Maxie v. Indiana Attorney General

Filing 8

OPINION AND ORDER re 6 AMENDED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Michael A Maxie. The Amended Petition is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. Clerk DIRECTED to close this case. Signed by Judge Philip P Simon on 7/21/17. (Copy mailed to pro se party).(cer)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION MICHAEL A. MAXIE, Petitioner, vs. INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 3:17CV438-PPS OPINION AND ORDER Michael A. Maxie, a petitioner without an attorney, filed an amended habeas corpus petition challenging his convictions and sentence by the Elkhart Superior Court on February 28, 2011, under cause number 20D01-0812-FC-102. This is not the first time that he has brought a habeas corpus petition challenging that conviction. In Maxie v. Superintendent, 3:14-cv-1444 (N.D. Ind. filed April 24, 2014), the court addressed the merits of his claims and denied his habeas corpus petition on April 17, 2015. He filed an untimely notice of appeal which the Seventh Circuit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on August 7, 2015. As such, this is a successive petition. However, Maxie has not been authorized to file a successive petition as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). “A district court must dismiss a second or successive petition, without awaiting any response from the government, 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 I must dismiss this case because this court lacks jurisdiction to hear it. ACCORDINGLY: The petition is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction and the clerk is DIRECTED to close this case. SO ORDERED. ENTERED: July 21, 2017 /s/ Philip P. Simon Judge United States District Court 2

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?