Collins v. Hood

Filing 6

ORDER OF TRANSFER: Ordered that this Petition for habeas corpus relief is transferred to the U S Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; and that the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case pending the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Signed by Chief District Judge Louis Guirola, Jr. on 9/17/15 (RLW)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
WILLIAM RAY COLLINS, #56532
v.

PETITIONER
CAUSE NO. 1:15cv282-LG-RHW

JIM HOOD

RESPONDENT
ORDER OF TRANSFER PURSUANT
TO 28 U.S.C § 1631

This matter comes before the Court, sua sponte, for consideration of the
transfer of this case. Petitioner William Ray Collins is an inmate of the Mississippi
Department of Corrections, who filed a request for habeas corpus relief in this Court
on August 31, 2015, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In his Petition, Collins
challenges his conviction for armed robbery entered on August 31, 2000, by the
Circuit Court for the First Judicial District of Harrison County, and his resulting
forty-year term of imprisonment. Petitioner has previously filed a Petition for
habeas relief in this Court challenging this same conviction and sentence. See
Collins v. Waller, No. 1:03-cv-304 (S.D. Miss. Dec. 29, 2006). This Court entered a
Final Judgment [34] dismissing the case with prejudice on December 29, 2006.
A petitioner who files a second or successive motion for habeas relief must first
apply to the appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court
to consider the successive motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). The Fifth Circuit
has defined “a second or successive petition as one that 1) raises a claim challenging
the petitioner’s conviction or sentence that was or could have been raised in an
earlier petition; or 2) otherwise constitutes an abuse of the writ.” Garcia v.

Quarterman, 573 F.3d 214, 220 (5th Cir. 2009) (citing In re Cain, 137 F.3d 234, 235
(5th Cir. 1998)) (internal quotations omitted).
The Court finds the instant Petition to be a successive petition within the
meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Petitioner has failed to submit any
documentation demonstrating that he has obtained the required authorization from
the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to file this successive
petition. Therefore, this Court has determined that in the interest of justice,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, this matter should be transferred to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for a determination whether this
successive or second Petition should be allowed. See generally In re Epps, 127 F.3d
364 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that this Petition for habeas corpus relief be, and the same
hereby is, TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit.
IT IS, FURTHER, ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to close
this case pending the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 17th day of September, 2015.
s/

Louis Guirola, Jr.

Louis Guirola, Jr.
Chief United States District Judge

2