Jamison v. State of Mississippi

District Court, N.D. Mississippi

Jamison v. State of Mississippi

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION ANDREW JAMISON PETITIONER V. NO. 3:21-CV-00014-GHD-DAS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS This matter comes before the Court, sua sponte, for consideration of the transfer of this cause. Petitioner Andrew Jamison has submitted a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under

28 U.S.C. § 2254

. Doc. #1. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced on charges of attempted armed robbery and possession of a stolen firearm in the Circuit Court of DeSoto County, Mississippi. Jamison has filed at least one other unsuccessful § 2254 petition concerning the same conviction which he now seeks to challenge. See Jamison v. Byrd, et al., 2:07-CV-00008- MPM-SAA. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act requires that before a district court considers a second or successive petition, “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). Jamison has failed to obtain such authorization. Rather than dismissing Jamison’s petition on this basis, the Fifth Circuit has allowed district courts to transfer the petition for consideration pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2244

(a) and (b)(3)(C). See In re Epps,

127 F.3d 364, 365

(Sth Cir. 1997). Therefore, in the interest of justice and judicial economy, it is hereby ORDERED: 1) That this petition shall be TRANSFERRED to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for the petitioner to seek permission to file his successive § 2254 petition;

2) That the Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this petition and the entire record to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in accordance with

28 U.S.C. § 2244

(a) and (b)(3)(C), and Jn re Epps,

127 F.3d at 365

; 3) That Jamison’s pending motion to proceed in forma pauperis [2] is dismissed as moot; and 4) That this case is CLOSED. This, the 21%, of January, 2021. he, ‘ 9 annMen UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI

Reference

Status
Unknown