Marcellus Charlemagne v. Secretary, Department of Corrections, et al., No. 20-10631 (11th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

USCA11 Case: 20-10631 Date Filed: 11/13/2020 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-10631 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 5:19-cv-00437-RBD-PRL MARCELLUS CHARLEMAGNE, Petitioner-Appellant, versus SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (November 13, 2020) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LAGOA and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 20-10631 Date Filed: 11/13/2020 Page: 2 of 2 Marcellus Charlemagne, a state prisoner, appeals pro se the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as second or successive. Charlemagne abandoned any challenge he could have made to the dismissal of his petition by raising in his initial brief only arguments about his state conviction. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). Charlemagne argues for the first time in his reply brief that his petition is not second or successive, but “we do not address arguments raised for the first time in a pro se litigant’s reply brief,” id. We affirm the dismissal of Charlemagne’s petition. AFFIRMED. 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.