FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

JAN 31 2000

PATRICK FISHER
Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

EDWIN J. GUNN,

Petitioner - Appellant,
vs.

J.W. BOOKER, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth,

Respondent - Appellee.	

No. 99-3345
(	D.C. No. 99-CV-3320-RDR)
(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BRORBY, KELLY, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.**

	Mr. Gunn, an inmate appearing pro se, appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 motion.  He was convicted on a jury verdict of being a felon in possession of a firearm, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and was sentenced as an armed career criminal, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e).  See United States v. Gunn, 962 F. Supp. 214 (D. Mass. 1997).  His conviction and sentence were upheld by the First Circuit in United States v. Gunn, No. 97-1498, 1998 WL 60404 (1st Cir. Feb. 10, 1998).  Mr. Gunn then sought relief through two § 2255 motions which were denied.  In the current § 2241 appeal, he claims, as he did on direct appeal, that he had not committed a felony (as defined by Massachusetts law) for purposes of his 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) conviction.  We affirm.
	§ 2255 is the exclusive remedy for testing the validity of a judgment and sentence, unless there is a showing that such remedy is inadequate or ineffective.  See Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996).  Mr. Gunn has not alleged any way in which § 2255 was an inadequate or ineffective avenue for testing his conviction.  Therefore, his § 2241 motion must fail and he has failed to establish any grounds warranting a successive § 2255 motion.  See 28 U.S.C. § 2244.
	AFFIRMED.  Mr. Gunn’s motion to amend is denied.
						Entered for the Court

						Paul J. Kelly, Jr.
						Circuit Judge