Opinion
Civil, Action No. 6:02-CV-034-C
May 28, 2002
ORDER
Petitioner George Goodson ("Goodson"), TDCJ-ID No. 548302, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on May 22, 2002, in the above-styled and captioned cause number. Petitioner complains, inter alia, that his trial counsel was Constitutionally ineffective and there was insufficient evidence to support his state-court conviction.
Respondent has lawful custody of Petitioner pursuant to a judgment and sentence of the 119th Judicial District Court of Tom Green County in cause number CR-89-0224-B On March 21, 1990, Petitioner was convicted of the first-degree felony offense of possession with intent to manufacture methamphetamine and was sentenced to ninety-nine (99) years' imprisonment in the Texas Department of Corrections, now known as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division ("TDCJ-ID"). Petitioner's conviction and sentence were affirmed on appeal and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has denied Petitioner's state habeas application(s).
Goodson was also convicted of the offense of aggravated possession of methamphetamine with intent to manufacture in cause number CR-89-0223-B and was sentenced to life imprisonment in the TDCJ-ID on October 18, 1989. Pursuant to the judgment in cause number CR-89-0224-B, the sentences were ordered to run cumulatively. He clearly states in the instant petition that he is challenging his conviction and sentence in cause number CR-89-0224-B.
The Court takes judicial notice of Civil Action No. 6; 99-CV-084-C filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, San Angelo Division, on September 20, 1999, by George Goodson, TDCJ-ID # 548302. Civil Action No. 6:99-CV-084-C was a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody challenging Goodson's conviction and sentence in state cause number CR-89-0224-B and was dismissed with prejudice as time-barred by Order dated December 13, 1999.
Goodson appealed the dismissal of Civil Action No. 6:99-CV-084-C, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied his request for a certificate of appealability by Order dated July 3, 2000 (USCA # 00-10091).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(3)(A), a second or successive habeas corpus proceeding may not be filed unless the petitioner moves "in the appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider the application." See Moran v. Stalder 121 F.3d 210, 211 (5th Cir. 1997) (holding that petitioners filing their § 2254 petitions in federal district court after April 24, 1996, are subject to the "successive" provisions enacted by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996). The Supreme Court observed in Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 664 (1996), that this requirement "simply transfers from the district court to the court of appeals a screening function which would previously have been performed by the district court."
Petitioner has not obtained, authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to file this successive petition; therefore, this Court is without authority to consider the instant petition. In re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 365 (5th Cir. 1997) (setting forth procedures which must be followed to request authorization to file a successive § 2254 petition).
It is, therefore ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied as successive.
Any pending motions are denied.