Wade v. Romanowski

Filing 48

OPINION AND ORDER transferring 47 Motion for reconsideration to the USCA for the Sixth Circuit. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (DPer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DION WADE,
Petitioner,
v.

Case Number 2:12-CV-14713
HONORABLE SEAN F. COX
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KENNETH ROMANOWSKI,
Respondent,
___________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
REGARDING THE SUCESSIVE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (ECF
No. 47) TO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Dione Wade, (“Petitioner”), filed a motion for permission to file a successive habeas
petition with the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which was denied. In Re
Wade, No. 20-1583 (6th Cir. Oct. 5, 2020). Petitioner has now filed a motion for reconsideration
of that decision, but with this Court. For the reasons that follow, the Clerk of the Court is directed
to transfer that motion to the Sixth Circuit.
I. Discussion
Petitioner already filed a prior petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his judgment
of sentence and incarceration.
An individual seeking to file a second or successive habeas petition must first ask the
appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider the petition. See
28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal, 523 U.S. 637, 641 (1998). When a
habeas petitioner files a second or successive petition for habeas corpus relief in the district court
without preauthorization from the court of appeals, the district court must transfer the document

1

to the court of appeals. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (directing that “[w]henever a civil action is filed in a
court ... and that court finds that there is a want of jurisdiction, the court shall, if it is in the interest
of justice, transfer such action ... to any other such court in which the action ... could have been
brought at the time it was filed”); In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir.1997)(holding that “when a
prisoner has sought § 2244(b)(3) permission from the district court, or when a second or successive
petition for habeas corpus relief or § 2255 motion is filed in the district court without § 2244(b)(3)
authorization from this court, the district court shall transfer the document to this court pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.”).
Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the Sixth Circuit’s decision to deny petitioner
permission to file a second habeas petition is not properly before this Court. This Court lacks
jurisdiction to entertain a § 2244 motion. See Riggleman v. W. Virginia Dep’t of Corr., 174 F.
App’x. 168, 169, n. 1 (4th Cir. 2006). This Court should instead forward the motion to the Sixth
Circuit for their determination whether petitioner should be permitted to file a second habeas
petition. Id.
Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is ordered to transfer the motion for reconsideration to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to Sims and 28 U.S.C. § 1631. See
Galka v. Caruso, 599 F. Supp. 2d 854, 857 (E.D. Mich. 2009).
II. ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk shall transfer the “Motion For Reconsideration” (ECF
No. 47) to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
Dated: January 12, 2021

s/Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
U. S. District Judge

2