"Motions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 are the presumptive means
by which federal prisoners can challenge their convictions or
sentences that are allegedly in violation of the Constitution."
Okereke v. United States, 307 F.3d 117
, 120 (3d Cir. 2002).
This is because § 2255 expressly prohibits a district court from
entertaining a challenge to a prisoner's federal sentence under §
2241 unless the remedy under § 2255 is "inadequate or
ineffective" to test the legality of the petitioner's detention.*fn2
See 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
Specifically, paragraph five of § 2255 provides:
An application for a writ of habeas corpus [pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 2241] in behalf of a prisoner who is
authorized to apply for relief by motion pursuant to
this section, shall not be entertained if it appears
that the applicant has failed to apply for relief, by
motion, to the court which sentenced him, or that
such court has denied him relief, unless it also
appears that the remedy by motion is inadequate or
ineffective to test the legality of his detention.
28 U.S.C. § 2255, ¶ 5; see Cradle v. U.S. ex rel. Miner,
290 F.3d 536
(3d Cir. 2002); In re Dorsainvil, 119 F.3d 245
(3d Cir. 1997); Millan-Diaz v. Parker, 444 F.2d 95
1971); Application of Galante, 437 F.2d 1164
(3d Cir. 1971)
(per curiam); United States ex rel. Leguillou v. Davis,
212 F.2d 681
, 684 (3d Cir. 1954).