Singleton v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - Document No. 3
Uploaded by
Justia.comSingleton v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - Document No. 3
Uploaded by
Justia.comCase 6:05-cv-00122-BAE-GRS Document 3 Filed 11/04/2005 Page 1 of 2
FtLE O
U.S . T COUR T
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGI"5 -4 AM 10: 54
STATESBORO DIVISIO N
LEROY SINGLETON, JR .,
}
Movant, }
}
v. ) Case No . CV605-122
[Underlying CR696-4]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
}
Respondent .
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIO N
Movant has filed a motion to vacate his federal sentence pursuant to
28 U.S.C . § 2255. Doc. 1 . Movant has previously filed a § 2255 motion with
this Court, and it was denied . CV600-122, Does. 1, 5, 8 . According to the
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub . L . 104-132,
Stat. 1214, "before a second or successive application permitted by [§ 2255]
is filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate
court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider the
application ." 28 U.S .C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) ; see 28 U.S .C. § 2255 (cross-
referencing § 2244 certification requirement) .
Case 6:05-cv-00122-BAE-GRS Document 3 Filed 11/04/2005 Page 2 of 2
The Seventh Circuit has held that this provision "is an allocation of
subject-matter jurisdiction to the court of appeals . A district court must
dismiss a second or successive petition, without awaiting any response from
the government, unless the court of appeals has given approval for its
filing." Nunez v . United States, 96 F .3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996) (emphasis
in original) . The Eleventh Circuit has reached the same result . Hill v.
Hopper, 112 F.3d 1088, 1089 (11th Cir . 1997) (finding district court lacked
jurisdiction to consider second § 2254 petition) ; In re Medina, 109 F.3d
1556, 1561 (11th Cir . 1997) (holding district court properly denied
successive petition because movant neglected to obtain certificate from
federal appellate court authorizing consideration of motion) .
Because movant has already filed under § 2255 and has failed to
provide certification from the Eleventh Circuit authorizing this Court to
consider this motion, this Court is without jurisdiction to consider movant's
petition at this time . Accordingly, the Court recommends that the instant
motion be DISMISSED as successive .
SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED this day of
November, 2005.
e'l
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGI A
