UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

SAMUEL LEWIS SURLES,

Petitioner, Case Number 2:20-CV-11526 HONORABLE ARTHUR J. TARNOW v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

DEWAYNE BURTON,

Respondent, ___________________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING SUCCESSIVE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

Samuel Lewis Surles, (“petitioner”), confined at the Handlon Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

. In his pro se application, petitioner challenges his 1969 conviction out of the Detroit Recorder’s Court for first- degree murder,

. Because the Court concludes that the present petition constitutes a “second or successive petition” within the meaning of

(b)(3), the Court will transfer the matter to the Court of Appeals so that the petitioner may seek permission to proceed. I. Background Petitioner was convicted of first-degree murder in the Detroit

Recorder’s Court in 1969 and was sentenced to life in prison. Petitioner previously filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, in which he challenged his first-degree murder conviction. The petition was denied

on the merits. Petitioner again seeks habeas relief from his incarceration. II. Discussion Petitioner already filed a prior petition for a writ of habeas corpus

challenging his judgment of sentence and incarceration. The petition was denied on the merits. Barnes v. Wells, No. 85-3551 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 5, 1986) (DeMascio, J.), cert. prob. cause den., No. 87-1445 (6th Cir. Aug. 24,

1987). The Sixth Circuit has twice denied petitioner permission to file a second or successive habeas petition. See In re: Samuel Surles, No. 97- 214 (6th Cir. June 24, 1998), In Re Surles, No. 13-1649 (6th Cir. Mar. 26, 2014). Petitioner had another habeas case transferred to the Sixth Circuit,

Surles v. Kapture, No. 2:00-cv-001 (W.D. Mich. Jan. 24, 2000), which was dismissed for want of prosecution. In re Surles, No. 00-1093 (6th Cir. Mar. 7, 2000). An individual seeking to file a second or successive habeas petition must first ask the appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the

district court to consider the petition. See

(b)(3)(A); Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal,

(1998). When a habeas petitioner files a second or successive petition for habeas corpus relief in

the district court without preauthorization from the court of appeals, the district court must transfer the document to the court of appeals. See

(directing that “[w]henever a civil action is filed in a court ... and that court finds that there is a want of jurisdiction, the court shall, if it is

in the interest of justice, transfer such action ... to any other such court in which the action ... could have been brought at the time it was filed”); In re Sims,

(6th Cir. 1997)(holding that “when a prisoner has

sought § 2244(b)(3) permission from the district court, or when a second or successive petition for habeas corpus relief or § 2255 motion is filed in the district court without § 2244(b)(3) authorization from this court, the district court shall transfer the document to this court pursuant to

.”); See also Ward v. Wolfenbarger,

(E.D. Mich. 2004). Petitioner has not obtained authorization from the Sixth Circuit to file

this successive petition. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is ordered to transfer the habeas petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant

to Sims and

. See Galka v. Caruso,

(E.D. Mich. 2009). III. ORDER

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk shall transfer the petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to

. s/Arthur J. Tarnow HON. ARTHUR J. TARNOW UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: July 8, 2020