Smith v. Wilson, No. 3:2007cv00313 - Document 4 (N.D. Ind. 2007)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER dismissing habeas corpus petition for want of jurisdiction; denying 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Eric D Smith.***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 7/19/07. (smp)

Download PDF
Smith v. Wilson Doc. 4 case 3:07-cv-00313-TLS document 4 filed 07/19/2007 page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA ERIC D. SMITH, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM K. WILSON, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 3:07-CV-313 TS OPINION AND ORDER Eric D. Smith, a pro se prisoner, filed this habeas corpus petition in the Southern District of Indiana attempting to challenge his loss of good time for theft in violation of B-224 on July 23, 2002, by the Westville Correctional Facility Disciplinary Hearing Board. Smith previously filed a habeas corpus petition challenging this same prison disciplinary proceeding in Smith v. Wilson, 3:07cv-152 (N.D. Ind. filed April 3, 2007); final judgment was entered in that case on May 3, 2007. It is currently pending on appeal in Smith v. Wilson, 07-2146 (7th Cir. filed May 15, 2007). Regardless of whether the claims that Smith is now attempting to present are new or whether the were presented in his previous petitions, this petition must be dismissed. A claim presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application under section 2254 that was presented in a prior application shall be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1). Therefore any claims previously presented must be dismissed. Additionally, for any claim not previously presented, Before a second or successive application permitted by this section is filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider the application. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). Here, Smith has not obtained an order from the court of appeals permitting him to proceed with any previously unpresented claims. A district court must dismiss a second or Dockets.Justia.com case 3:07-cv-00313-TLS document 4 filed 07/19/2007 page 2 of 2 successive petition . . . 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 any previously unpresented claims must also be dismissed. For the foregoing reasons, the habeas corpus petition is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction and the in forma pauperis petition is DENIED. SO ORDERED on July 19, 2007. s/ Theresa L. Springmann THERESA L. SPRINGMANN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORT WAYNE DIVISION 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.