Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 9423141
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Hosea Swopes v. A. Ciolli
No. 9423141 · Decided August 29, 2023
No. 9423141·Ninth Circuit · 2023·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
August 29, 2023
Citation
No. 9423141
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 29 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HOSEA LATRON SWOPES, No. 22-16054
Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No.
1:21-cv-01418-JLT-HBK
v.
A. CIOLLI, Warden, MEMORANDUM*
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Jennifer L. Thurston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 25, 2023**
San Francisco, California
Before: BUMATAY, KOH, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Hosea Swopes appeals from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Swopes challenged his underlying Missouri sentence under the “escape
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
-
hatch” or “saving clause” of 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which allows a federal prisoner to
file a § 2241 petition if his remedy under § 2255 was “inadequate or ineffective.”
28 U.S.C. § 2255(e); see also Alaimalo v. United States, 645 F.3d 1042, 1047 (9th
Cir. 2011). Since the parties briefed this case, however, the Supreme Court issued
a decision in Jones v. Hendrix, 143 S. Ct. 1857 (2023). Jones held that § 2255(e)
“does not permit a prisoner asserting an intervening change in statutory
interpretation to circumvent [the] restrictions on second or successive § 2255
motions by filing a § 2241 petition.” 143 S. Ct. at 1864.
Swopes concedes that Jones is dispositive and forecloses his claim under
§ 2241.1 Because Swopes had no right to file a § 2241 petition in the first instance,
we need not address his challenges to the enhancement of his sentence in light of
Borden v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (2021). Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s decision that it lacked jurisdiction.2
AFFIRMED.
1
The parties filed supplemental briefing in light of Jones.
2
Swopes’s motion to take judicial notice (Dkt. 11) and Appellee’s unopposed
motion to supplement the record (Dkt. 20) are denied as moot.
- 2
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 29 2023 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 29 2023 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HOSEA LATRON SWOPES, No.
03Thurston, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 25, 2023** San Francisco, California Before: BUMATAY, KOH, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.
04Federal prisoner Hosea Swopes appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 29 2023 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Hosea Swopes v. A. Ciolli in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on August 29, 2023.
Use the citation No. 9423141 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.