IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division MARK TODD CHRISTOPHERSON, ) Petitioner, Vv. Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-351-HEH HAROLD CLARKE, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing Successive § 2254 Petition) Petitioner Mark Todd Christopherson (“Petitioner”), a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, submitted a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

(the “Petition,” ECF No. 1) on May 15, 2024, challenging his convictions in the Circuit Court for New Kent County. (Pet. at 2.)! The Court previously denied a

petition filed by Petitioner challenging these convictions. See Christopherson v. Johnson, No. 3:10-cv-724-HEH,

, at *1, *5 (E.D. Va. Aug. 16, 2011). The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 restricted the jurisdiction of 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 quotations 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

! The Court employs the pagination assigned by the CM/ECF docketing system.

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 Fourth Circuit to consider the

present § 2254 petition. Therefore, the action will be dismissed without prejudice for

want of jurisdiction. An appropriate Final Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion. M3he— Henry E. Hudson Senior United States District Judge Date: Tune 25 202-4 Richmond, VA