Opinion
No. 20-10631
11-13-2020
MARCELLUS CHARLEMAGNE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee.
[DO NOT PUBLISH] Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 5:19-cv-00437-RBD-PRL Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LAGOA and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:
Marcellus Charlemagne, a state prisoner, appeals pro se the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as second or successive. Charlemagne abandoned any challenge he could have made to the dismissal of his petition by raising in his initial brief only arguments about his state conviction. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). Charlemagne argues for the first time in his reply brief that his petition is not second or successive, but "we do not address arguments raised for the first time in a pro se litigant's reply brief," id. We affirm the dismissal of Charlemagne's petition.
AFFIRMED.