Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wells v. Peterson

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division

June 12, 2018

NICHOLAS WELLS, # 207770, Petitioner,
v.
KENNETH PETERSON, et al., Respondents.

          RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

          WALLACE CAPEL, JR. CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Through a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed on September 23, 2016, Nicholas Wells (“Wells) challenges convictions entered against him in two cases in the Circuit Court of Covington County, Alabama. Doc. No. 1.[1] The first set of convictions challenged by Wells comprises convictions imposed against him for three counts of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance following a jury trial in the Covington Circuit Court in March 2004 in No. CC-03-414.[2] The second set of convictions challenged by Wells comprises convictions imposed against him for breaking and entering a vehicle and first-degree receipt of stolen property pursuant to a guilty plea entered in the Covington Circuit Court in March 2005 in No. CC-02-417.[3]

         For the reasons that follow, to the extent Wells challenges his controlled substance convictions in No. CC-03-414, his petition is a successive petition subject to dismissal because it was filed without preauthorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. And to the extent Wells challenges his convictions for breaking and entering a vehicle and receipt of stolen property No. CC-02-417, his petition is time-barred under AEDPA's one-year limitation period.[4]

         II. DISCUSSION

         A. Controlled Substance Convictions: Covington Circuit Court No. CC-03-14

         Wells has filed a previous habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his March 2004 controlled substance convictions in Covington Circuit Court No. CC-03-414. The instant § 2254 petition represents Wells's second attempt in this court at challenging those convictions. Wells's previous § 2254 petition, which he filed in this court in February 2012, was denied and dismissed with prejudice on July 16, 2014. See Wells v. White, et al., Civil Action No. 2:12cv274-TMH (M.D. Ala. 2014).

         Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), “[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)(A). “A motion in the court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive application shall be determined by a three-judge panel of the court of appeals” and may be granted “only if [the assigned panel of judges] determines that the application makes a prima facie showing that the application satisfies the requirements of [28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1) or (b)(2)].”[5] 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(B) & (C).

         Wells furnishes no certification from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals authorizing this court to proceed on his successive petition challenging his March 2004 controlled substance convictions. “Because this undertaking [is a successive] habeas corpus petition and because [Wells] had no permission from [the Eleventh Circuit] to file a [successive] habeas petition, . . . the district court lack[s] jurisdiction to grant the requested relief.” Gilreath v. State Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 273 F.3d 932, 933 (11th Cir. 2001). See Farris v. United States, 333 F.3d 1211, 1216 (11th Cir. 2003) (providing that, without an order from the court of appeals authorizing the district court to consider a successive habeas petition, the district courts lack jurisdiction to consider the petition).

         Consequently, to the extent Wells is challenging his controlled substance convictions in Covington Circuit Court No. CC-03-414, his § 2254 petition should be dismissed as a successive petition filed without the requisite preauthorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

         B. Convictions for Breaking and Entering a Vehicle and Receipt of Stolen Property: Covington Circuit Court No. CC-02-417

         Title 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) provides the statute of limitations for § 2254 petitions and states:

(1) A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run from the latest of-
(A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.