Andre Whitfield v. US

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for summary disposition (Local Rule 27(f)) [999893785-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999857836-2]; dismissing Motion for writ of habeas corpus (FRAP 21) filed by Petitioner Andre D. Whitfield [999861609-2], dismissing Motion for writ of habeas corpus (FRAP 21) filed by Petitioner Andre D. Whitfield [999840776-2] Originating case number: 3:07-cr-00300-HEH-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999940923]. Mailed to: A Whitfield. [16-1620]

Appeal: 16-1620

Doc: 11

Filed: 10/04/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1620

In Re:

ANDRE D. WHITFIELD,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.
(3:07-cr-00300-HEH-1)

Submitted:

September 23, 2016

Decided:

October 4, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andre D. Whitfield, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1620

Doc: 11

Filed: 10/04/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Andre Whitfield, a federal prisoner, filed an original 28
U.S.C.

§ 2241

convictions

on

(2012)
the

petition,

ground

that

challenging
the

jurisdiction over the criminal matter.

district

his
court

various
lacked

We ordinarily decline to

entertain an original § 2241 petition, and this case presents no
reason to depart from this general rule.

Further, we find that

the interest of justice would not be served by transferring the
matter to the appropriate district court, see 28 U.S.C. § 1631
(2012); Fed. R. App. P. 22(a), as Whitfield previously filed a
§ 2241 petition in the district court raising the same claim
that he does in this court.

We therefore deny leave to proceed

in forma pauperis and dismiss the petition.
oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the

facts

the

and

materials

We dispense with

legal

contentions

before

argument would not aid the decisional process.

the

court

are
and

We deny the

motion for summary disposition.
PETITION DISMISSED

2