Opinion
Civil Action 19-923 SEC P
04-19-2021
JAMES L. COLVIN #84581-012/102489 v. ROBERT TANNER
HORNSBY MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ORDER
ELIZABETH ERNY FOOTE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the Court's judgement adopting the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and denying Petitioner's motion to amend his complaint to add a claim pursuant to McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S.Ct. 1500 (2018). Record Document 22. Petitioner argues that the Court's ruling regarding his motion to amend is clearly erroneous because it was based on the 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(A) rule regarding second or successive habeas petitions and that rule is inapplicable to his situation. Id. at 1. Petitioner asserts that his petition asserting a McCoy claim is better classified as a claim "brought on `Direct Review' pursuant to 28 U.S.C. [§] 2244(d)(1)(A) because McCoy [sic] was decided in May 2018" and his "state conviction was not made final until February 11, 2019." Id.
This argument is unpersuasive. First, this Court is not directly reviewing any of Petitioner's claims because a federal habeas petition is collateral review, not direct review. Wall v. Kholi, 562 U.S. 545, 552 (2011). Second, as this Court has already held, when the Louisiana Supreme Court issued a final ruling dismissing Petitioner's application for postconviction relief in February 2019, this was not a new judgment such that Petitioner is entitled to file the instant habeas petition without meeting the second or successive petition requirements of § 2244(b). Record Document 7 at 1-2. Petitioner's motion for reconsideration [Record Document 22] is therefore DENIED.