Sheppard v. Medeiros, 15-13364-GAO. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Massachusetts
Number: infdco20160421a91
Visitors: 14
Filed: Apr. 20, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 20, 2016
Summary: ORDER GEORGE A. O'TOOLE, Jr. , District Judge . The pending petition under 28 U.S.C. 2254 appears to be a second or successive petition. Because the record lacks any evidence to suggest that Sheppard has obtained permission from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the petition. See Pratt v. United States , 129 F.3d 54 , 57 (1st Cir. 1997). Consequently, Medeiros's Motion to Dismiss (dkt. no. 17) is GRANTED and the petition
Summary: ORDER GEORGE A. O'TOOLE, Jr. , District Judge . The pending petition under 28 U.S.C. 2254 appears to be a second or successive petition. Because the record lacks any evidence to suggest that Sheppard has obtained permission from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the petition. See Pratt v. United States , 129 F.3d 54 , 57 (1st Cir. 1997). Consequently, Medeiros's Motion to Dismiss (dkt. no. 17) is GRANTED and the petition i..
More
ORDER
GEORGE A. O'TOOLE, Jr., District Judge.
The pending petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 appears to be a second or successive petition. Because the record lacks any evidence to suggest that Sheppard has obtained permission from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the petition. See Pratt v. United States, 129 F.3d 54, 57 (1st Cir. 1997). Consequently, Medeiros's Motion to Dismiss (dkt. no. 17) is GRANTED and the petition is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to renewal if permission to file is granted by the First Circuit. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Sheppard's Motion for Hearing (dkt. no. 15), Motion to Strike (dkt. no. 21), and Motion for Judgment in Accord with U.S. Supreme Court Decisions (dkt. no. 22) are MOOT.
No certificate of appealability shall issue because Sheppard has not "made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
It is SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
