IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division SEAN S. EARL, ) Petitioner, Vv. Civil Action No. 3:21CV294-HEH COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, 5 Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing Successive § 2254 Petition) Petitioner, a Virginia prisoner proceeding pro se, submitted a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to

, challenging his convictions in the Circuit

Court for the City of Portsmouth for murder, malicious wounding, and two counts of use

ofa firearm in the commission of a felony. The Court previously has denied a

petition filed by Petitioner challenging these convictions. See Earl v. Virginia,

No. 3:19CV547,

, at *1 (E.D. Va. June 11, 2020).

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 restricted the

jurisdiction of the district courts to hear second or successive applications for federal

habeas corpus relief by prisoners attacking the validity of their convictions and sentences

by establishing a “gatekeeping mechanism.” Felker v. Turpin,

(1996)

(internal quotation marks omitted). Specifically, “[blefore 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.”

(b)(3)(A). The Court has not received authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to file the present § 2254 petition. Therefore, the action will be dismissed without prejudice for want of jurisdiction. A certificate of appealability will be denied. An appropriate Final Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

Henry E. Hudson Date May 26,202 § Senior United States District Judge Richmond Virginia