Edwards v. Superintendent

Full title: STEVEN EDWARDS, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT, WESTVILLE CORRECTIONAL…

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Indiana

Date published: Apr 7, 2008

CAUSE NO. 3:08-CV-148-TS (N.D. Ind. Apr. 7, 2008)

Opinion

CAUSE NO. 3:08-CV-148-TS.

April 7, 2008

OPINION AND ORDER

THERESA SPRINGMANN, Magistrate Judge

Steven Edwards, a pro se prisoner, filed this habeas corpus petition attempting to challenge his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to commit murder by the Marion Superior Court on August 27, 1999, in cause number 49G04-9902-CF-021008. This is not the first time that he has done so. In Edwards v. Knight, No. 1:06-CV-535, 2006 WL 2540359 (S.D. Ind., filed April 3, 2006), his habeas corpus petition was denied on August 30, 2006. He filed a notice of appeal as to that judgment, but he was denied a certificate of appealability by both the district court and the Seventh Circuit, which issued its mandate on December 28, 2006. Later, he sought leave from the Seventh Circuit to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition, but was denied on January 31, 2008, in Edwards v. Wilson, No. 08-1053 (7th Cir. 2008).

Nevertheless, the Petitioner has now filed a second or successive habeas corpus petition in this Court. Regardless of whether the claims that he is now attempting to present are new or whether they were presented in his previous petition, this petition must be dismissed. "A claim presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application under section 2254 that was presented in a prior application shall be dismissed." 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1). Therefore any claims previously presented must be dismissed. Additionally, for any claim not previously presented,

[b]efore a second or successive application permitted by this section 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). The Petitioner has not been authorized to bring a second or successive petition by the Seventh Circuit. "A district court must dismiss a second or successive petition . . . unless the court of appeals has given approval for its filing." Nunez v. United States, 96 F.3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996). Therefore any previously unpresented claims must also be dismissed.

For the foregoing reasons, the habeas corpus petition [DE 1] is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction and the in forma pauperis petition [DE 2] is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.