Opinion
3:05-CV-0933-T WO.
November 18, 2005
ORDER
On October 12, 2005 (Doc. 4), the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is
ORDERED that the Recommendation is adopted and that:
1. The 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief filed by West Crim on September 28, 2005, is DENIED.
2. This cause of action is DISMISSED in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) as the petitioner has failed to obtain the requisite order from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals authorizing this court to consider a successive habeas application.
The court notes that any § 2254 petition filed by the petitioner is likewise subject to the one-year period of limitation contained in 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1). Moreover, the court finds that there are no circumstances present in this case which "would entitle [Crim] in the interest of justice to transfer [pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631] or stay . . . because the limitations period had already expired before he filed" the instant habeas action. Guenther v. Holt, 173 F.3d 1328, 1330-1331 (11th Cir. 1999).