Habeas Petition- “Saving Clause”

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Carlous Horton v. Stanley Lovett

Case No.: 21-1004

Officials: Sykes, Chief Judge, and Scudder and Jackson -Akiwumi, Circuit Judges

Focus: Habeas Petition- “Saving Clause”

In 2012, Horton was found guilty of several drug trafficking and firearm offenses. He had previously been convicted of four state drug felonies. As a result, he was sentenced to three concurrent life sentences. Horton’s attempts to appeal directly and seek collateral relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 were unsuccessful. According to 2255(h), a subsequent motion is only allowed if it presents “newly discovered evidence” of innocence or is based on a “new rule of constitutional law” that the Supreme Court has made retroactive for collateral review cases. In a bid to challenge his detention, Horton filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. 2241, citing the “saving clause” of 28 U.S.C. 2255(e). However, a 2241 motion can only be considered if the remedy through a 2255 motion is deemed “inadequate or ineffective” to test the legality of the detention.

Previously, the Seventh Circuit had established in the Davenport case that 2255 is deemed “inadequate or ineffective” and 2241 can be pursued when the restrictions on successive 2255 motions prevent relief, and the prisoner’s claim is based on a new interpretation of a criminal statute that had previously been precluded by circuit precedent. Horton’s claim in accordance with Davenport challenged his sentences based on the Mathis decision made by the Supreme Court in 2016.

However, a subsequent Supreme Court ruling in Jones v. Hendrix (2022) clarified that the inability of a prisoner with a statutory claim to meet the conditions of 2255 does not automatically grant them the right to bring their claim through a habeas petition under the saving clause. Instead, it indicates that they cannot bring the claim at all. In light of this ruling, the Seventh Circuit upheld the denial of relief and invalidated the Davenport precedent.

Affirmed.

Decided 07/07/23

Full Text