MCCUNE
v.
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (POLK COUNTY)
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A petitioner may not simultaneously litigate duplicative habeas actions in the same court against the same respondent.
Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging convictions for which he already has a pending habeas petition in the same court. …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Duplicative Litigation cases and more on FLexlaw
Mr. McCune initiated this action by filing a petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) in which he challenges convictions for resisting arrest with violence, battery on a law enforcement officer, and grand theft. Mr. McCune has another petition for the writ of habeas corpus, pending in this Court, that challenges the same convictions. See McCune v. Secretary, Dep’t. of Corr., Case No. 8:22-cv-218-CEH-TGW (M.D.Fla.). Mr. McCune may not simultaneously litigate duplicative habeas actions in two cases in this Court. See Smith v. United States, 2014 WL 4693160, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 19, 2014) (“Petitioner may not simultaneously pursue two habeas petitions against the same Respondent concerning the same underlying conviction or sentence.”). Therefore, because McCune first filed a petition in Case No. 8:22-cv-
218-CEH-TGW, this action will be dismissed. See Curtis v. Citibank, N.A., 226 F. 3d 133, 138 39 (2d Cir. 2000) (where actions are identical “simple dismissal of the second suit is [a] common disposition because plaintiffs have no right to maintain two actions on the same subject in the same court, against the same defendant at the same time”). Accordingly, the petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice to Mr. McCune pursuing his claims in Case No. 8:22-cv-218-CEH-TGW (M.D.Fia.).! The Clerk must CLOSE this case. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on November 9, 2022.
litho,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copy to: Willie David McCune, pro se
1 If Mr. McCune intended to amend the petition in Case No. 8:22-cv-218-CEH-TGW, he should move for leave to amend in that case.