Sims v. Superintendent Indiana State Prison

Filing 3

OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING habeas corpus petition for want of jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Robert L Miller Jr on 2/2/07. (smp)

Download PDF
Sims v. Superintendent Indiana State Prison Doc. 3 case 3:07-cv-00036-RLM document 3 filed 02/02/2007 page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION MICHAEL SIMS, Petitioner v. SUPERINTENDENT INDIANA STATE PRISON, Respondent ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 3:07-CV-036 RM OPINION AND ORDER Michael Sims, a pro se prisoner, filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. 2254. Mr. Sims states that he has previously sought habeas corpus relief before this court in Sims v. Davis, 3:03-CV-401 (N.D. IND. filed June 3, 2003). A claim presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application under section 2254 that was presented in a prior application shall be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(1). Therefore to the extent he is attempting to raise previously presented claims, they must be dismissed. Before a second or successive application permitted by [28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(2) which was not presented in a prior application] 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. 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(3). Mr. Sims has not obtained an order from the court of appeals. "A district court must dismiss a second or successive petition . . . unless the court of appeals has given approval for its filing." Nunez v. United States, 96 F.3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996) (emphasis in original). Therefore to the extent he is attempting to raise new claims, they must also be dismissed. case 3:07-cv-00036-RLM document 3 filed 02/02/2007 page 2 of 2 For the foregoing reasons, the habeas corpus petition is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. ENTERED: February 2 , 2007 /s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. Chief Judge United State District Court

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?