Filed: Aug. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 28, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT AND TRANSFERRING MOTION TO THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AS A SUCCESSIVE HABEAS PETITION DENISE PAGE HOOD , Chief District Judge . This matter is now before the Court on Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment Denying Habeas Relief. (ECF No. 108) On February 22, 1991, an Opinion and Order denying the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was filed, along with Judgment. (ECF Nos. 51, 52) Petitioner has since filed se
Summary: ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT AND TRANSFERRING MOTION TO THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AS A SUCCESSIVE HABEAS PETITION DENISE PAGE HOOD , Chief District Judge . This matter is now before the Court on Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment Denying Habeas Relief. (ECF No. 108) On February 22, 1991, an Opinion and Order denying the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was filed, along with Judgment. (ECF Nos. 51, 52) Petitioner has since filed sev..
More
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT AND TRANSFERRING MOTION TO THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AS A SUCCESSIVE HABEAS PETITION
DENISE PAGE HOOD, Chief District Judge.
This matter is now before the Court on Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment Denying Habeas Relief. (ECF No. 108) On February 22, 1991, an Opinion and Order denying the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was filed, along with Judgment. (ECF Nos. 51, 52) Petitioner has since filed several post-judgment motions. On August 22, 2017, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals entered an Order denying Petitioner's latest successive motion. (ECF No. 107). For the reasons set forth below, the Court must transfer this motion to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals as another successive motion.
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), codified at 28 U.S.C. § 2241 et. seq., amended 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244, 2253, and 2254, governs habeas corpus proceedings in federal courts. Pursuant to those amendments, an individual seeking to file a "second or successive" habeas petition must ask the appropriate court of appeals for an order directing the district court to consider the petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal, 523 U.S. 637, 641 (1998); In re Wilson, 142 F.3d 939, 940 (6th Cir. 1998). This requirement transfers to the court of appeals a screening function which the district court previously performed. Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 664 (1996). The Sixth Circuit requires a successive § 2255 motion to be transferred to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. In re Nailor, 487 F.3d 1018, 1022-23 (6th Cir. 2007). Any Rule 60(b) motion is considered a second or successive § 2255 motion which must be transferred to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for certification. In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir. 1997); Gonzales v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 531 (2005).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. (ECF No. 108)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court TRANSFER this Motion for Relief from Judgment to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
