Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Mitchell v. Bledsoe, 01-7636 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7636 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 08, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7636 DWAYNE MITCHELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BRIAN A. BLEDSOE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-112) Submitted: January 31, 2002 Decided: February 8, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwayne Mitchell
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7636 DWAYNE MITCHELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BRIAN A. BLEDSOE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-112) Submitted: January 31, 2002 Decided: February 8, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwayne Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se. Rita R. Valdrini, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dwayne Mitchell seeks to appeal from the district court’s order construing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 1994) as one pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) and denying it. Although Mitchell’s § 2255 motion was successive, the district court did not dismiss it on that basis. Because Mitchell did not obtain authorization from this court to file his successive § 2255 motion in the district court, the district court lacked authority to consider it. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(b)(3) (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer