From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

NASH v. HEPP

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Jul 24, 2008
Case No. 08-CV-534 (E.D. Wis. Jul. 24, 2008)

Opinion

Case No. 08-CV-534.

July 24, 2008


ORDER


On June 23, 2008, petitioner DeAnthony A. Nash ("Nash") filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241 and 2254, challenging his State of Wisconsin convictions and imprisonment. Nash has previously filed petitions under § 2254, thereby making his current petition successive as the Rules Governing Section 2254.

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), a district court may not consider a second or otherwise successive § 2254 petition unless the prisoner has previously obtained authorization from the appropriate court of appeals. Section 2244(b). If a prisoner files a successive § 2254 petition in a district court without having obtained such authorization, the court must dismiss it for want of subject matter jurisdiction. Nunez v. United States, 96 F.3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996). Although Nash purports to bring his habeas petition to pursuant to §§ 2241 and 2254, the § 2254 rules specifically state that the district court may apply them to other habeas petitions. See Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases; see also Peoples v. Chatman, 393 F.3d 1352, 1352 (11th Cir. 2004) (concluding that § 2241 petitions are subject to the same restrictions as § 2254 petitions); Walker v. O'Brien, 216 F.3d 626, 633 (7th Cir. 2000) (stating that "as a practical matter the requirements of § 2254 must be met by all state prisoners filing petitions for writs of habeas corpus after conviction").

Nash has filed a motion for an order authorizing a successive petition, but the Seventh Circuit denied his motion on July 16, 2008. Furthermore, the Seventh Circuit imposed a $500.00 sanction upon Nash pursuant to its previous decisions in Alexander v. United States, 121 F.3d 312 (7th Cir. 1997) and Support Sys. Int'l v. Mack, 45 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1995). Clearly, this court has no jurisdiction to consider Nash's current petition and it must be dismissed.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Nash's petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241 and 2254 be and the same is hereby DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.


Summaries of

NASH v. HEPP

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Jul 24, 2008
Case No. 08-CV-534 (E.D. Wis. Jul. 24, 2008)
Case details for

NASH v. HEPP

Case Details

Full title:DEANTHONY A. NASH, Petitioner, v. RANDALL R. HEPP, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Date published: Jul 24, 2008

Citations

Case No. 08-CV-534 (E.D. Wis. Jul. 24, 2008)

Citing Cases

Enis v. Butler

The rules governing § 2254 proceedings specifically authorize a district court to apply them to other habeas…