In re: Michael Stansell

Filing

OPINION and JUDGMENT filed: The motion for authorization to file a second or successive 2254 petition is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY, and the case is TRANSFERRED to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of this court. Decision for publication. Jeffrey S. Sutton (AUTHORING) and Deborah L. Cook, Circuit Judges; and Joseph M. Hood, U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.

Case: 15-4244

Document: 7-3

Filed: 07/01/2016

Page: 1

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-4244

FILED

In re: MICHAEL STANSELL,
Movant.

Jul 01, 2016
DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk

Before: SUTTON and COOK, Circuit Judges; HOOD, District Judge.
JUDGMENT
On Motion to Authorize the Filing of a Second or
Successive Application for Habeas Corpus Relief.
THIS CAUSE was heard on the record from the district court, the motion and reply of the
Movant, and the response of the Warden.
IN CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is ORDERED that the motion for authorization to file a
second or successive § 2254 petition is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY, and the case is TRANSFERRED
to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of this court.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Deborah S. Hunt, Clerk