UTSEY
v.
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
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.
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas petition without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Petitioner, an inmate, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging prior convictions. This was a second or successive petition, an…
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 28 U.S.C. § 2244(B)(3)(A) Authorization Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner, James Henry Utsey, an inmate of the Florida penal system, initiated this case by filing a pro se Petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1). Utsey challenges his 2004 Citrus County convictions for first-degree murder and fleeing and eluding police, for which he is serving a life sentence. This Court previously adjudicated Utsey’s federal habeas claims challenging these convictions. See Utsey v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corr., Order (Doc. 15), Case No. 5:06-cv-309-Oc-10GRJ. In light of the prior adjudication, this Court has no authority to consider Utsey’s claims without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) (requiring an order from the “appropriate court of appeals . . . authorizing the district court to consider” a second or successive application); Insignares v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 755 F. 3d 1273, 1278 (11th Cir. 2014) (“[A] district judge lacks jurisdiction to decide
a second or successive petition filed without [the Eleventh Circuit’s] authorization.”). Utsey has not obtained leave from the Eleventh Circuit to file a successive petition. If Utsey wishes to proceed on a second or successive habeas petition, he
must first seek authorization from the Eleventh Circuit. To the extent Utsey seeks to challenge the conditions of his confinement at Hardee Correctional Institution, he should initiate a civil rights complaint in the appropriate district court.
Because this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider Utsey’s second or successive petition, a certificate of appealability cannot issue in this action. See Williams v. Chatman, 510 F. 3d 1290, 1295 (11th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, it is
ORDERED:
1. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice.
2. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing this case without prejudice, terminate any pending motions, and close the case.
3. The Clerk is directed to send Petitioner the following forms: “Application for Leave to File a Second or Successive Habeas Corpus Petition 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) By a Prisoner in State Custody” and “Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights (Prisoner Complaint).” DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida, this 138th day of November, 2020.
Jax-6 C: James Henry Utsey