IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division QUINDELL MONTRAE’ KIRBY, ) Petitioner, Vv. Civil Action No. 3:23-cv-216—HEH HAROLD CLARKE, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing Successive § 2254 Petition) Petitioner, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, submitted a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

, challenging his convictions in the Circuit Court for the County of Chesterfield, Virginia of second-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a murder. (ECF No. 1 at 1.) The Court previously denied a

petition filed by Petitioner challenging these convictions. Kirby v. Clarke, No. 3:17CV559,

, at *1—*4 (E.D. Va. May 11, 2018). 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, “[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.”

(b)(3)(A). The Court has not received authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to consider 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: Borci 14.2023 Senior United States District Judge Richmond, Virginia