Harris v. MacLaren

Filing 4

ORDER Transferring Case to USCA for the Sixth Circuit. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (SSch)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ISAAC DeCURTIS HARRIS,
Petitioner,

Case No. 2:16-cv-14399
Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow

v.
DUNCAN MACLAREN,
Respondent.
________________________________________/
ORDER TRANSFERRING SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE HABEAS PETITION TO
THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Petitioner, Isaac DeCurtis Harris, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus
challenging his Lenawee Circuit Court convictions of armed robbery, carrying a
weapon with unlawful intent, and possessing a firearm during the commission of a
felony. Dkt. 1, at 14, 26. Because Petitioner previously filed habeas petitions
challenging these convictions, this case will be transferred to the United States Court
of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) on the grounds
that this Court does not have jurisdiction absent an order of authorization to consider
this successive habeas petition from that Court.
I. Discussion
Petitioner’s current habeas petition alleges that: (1) a police officer arrested
him without probable cause, (2) the state magistrate judge erroneously issued a
felony warrant, and (3) he was sentenced as a habitual offender without receiving
notice of the enhancement.

Petitioner has previously sought federal habeas relief on two occassions. His
first habeas petition was denied for lack of merit. Harris v. McQuiggin, No.
2:08-cv-198, 2011 WL 4560071 (W.D. Mich. June 3, 2011) (Edgar, J.). His second
habeas petition was transferred to the Sixth Circuit, where his application for
permission to file a successive petition was denied. In re Harris, No. 13-1133 (6th
Cir. May 29, 2013).
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). Congress has vested in the
court of appeals a screening function that the district court would have performed
otherwise. Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 664 (1996). 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 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”); Sims v. Terbush, 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
-2-

transfer the document to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.”).
The instant case is Petitioner’s third attempt to obtain federal habeas relief
with respect to his state court convictions. Petitioner cannot proceed with this
successive petition, however, without first acquiring permission to file it from the
court of appeals. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court shall transfer this case to the
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631 for a
determination of whether this Court may consider Petitioner’s habeas corpus claims.
II. Order
It is ORDERED that the Clerk shall transfer the petition to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

s/Arthur J. Tarnow
Honorable Arthur J. Tarnow
United States District Judge
Dated: December 28, 2016

-3-