Foreman v. Turner

Filing 11

Memorandum Opinion and Order. Because Mr. Foreman has failed to receive authorization from the Sixth Circuit to file this successive §2254 motion, the motion may not be reviewed by the Court at this juncture. Therefore, the Clerk of Court is directed to transfer Mr. Foreman's instant motion to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals pursuant to In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir. 1997). IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 5/1/2020. re 9 . (M,S)

convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found
the movant guilty of the offense; or
(2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on
collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously
unavailable.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h).
Mr. Foreman did not pursue his request to file a second petition in the Court of Appeals
and the petition was, therefore, dismissed for want of prosecution. (ECF #8). Months later, he file
another petition seeking the same relief, but labeled as a Motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Mr.
Foreman cannot avoid the requirements of §2255 by simply re-naming his petition as a 60(b)
motion, and he has offered no legitimate grounds that would support a motion under Fed. R. Civ.
P. 60(b). Because Mr. Foreman has failed to receive authorization from the Sixth Circuit to file
this successive §2254 motion, the motion may not be reviewed by the Court at this juncture.
Therefore, the Clerk of Court is directed to transfer Mr. Foreman's instant motion to the Sixth
Circuit Court of Appeals pursuant to In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir. 1997).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date

)11, I \ 1-oi.o

Donald C. Nugent
Senior United States D strict Judge

2