Pleasant v. Clarke, No. 3:2014cv00154 - Document 4 (E.D. Va. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 10/14/2014. Copy mailed to Petitioner. (ccol, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Pleasant v. Clarke Doc. 4 P IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 OCT I 5 20[4 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT RICHMOND. VA JEFFREY A. PLEASANT, Petitioner, V. Civil Action No. HAROLD W. 3:14CV154 CLARKE, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION Petitioner, Jeffrey proceeding pro se, corpus pursuant A. Pleasant, a Virginia prisoner submitted this petition for a writ of habeas to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Because challenges his convictions for robbery and use of a Pleasant firearm in commission of that robbery in the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, U.S.C. Virginia § petition must 2254. See Huff, v. at 2674030, Crosby, his (E.D. July *2 351 F. 3d 1049, Va. 1060 Virginia, 7, a convictions. 28 U.S.C. (11th Cir. § 2254 brought No. 2008) Opinion and Order entered March 30, dismissed be 3:07CV691, (citing 2003)). 2005, petition pursuant to 28 2008 WL Medberry v. By Memorandum the Court previously challenging these Pleasant v. True, No. 3:04CV429 (E.D. Va. Mar. 30, 2005). The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 restricted the jurisdiction of the district courts to hear Dockets.Justia.com second or successive applications for federal habeas corpus relief by prisoners attacking the validity of their convictions and sentences Felker v. by establishing Turpin, 518 U.S. a 651, "^gatekeeping' 657 (1996). mechanism." Specifically, "[b]efore 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 § 2244(b)(3)(A). authorization the Because from the application." Pleasant has United States Court 28 not U.S.C. obtained of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to file a successive § 2254 petition challenging his convictions and sentence, this Court entertain the present § 2254 petition. lacks jurisdiction to Accordingly, the action will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a judge issues a certificate of appealability ("COA") . 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A COA will not issue unless a prisoner makes "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional requirement is debate whether right." satisfied (or, should have been issues presented for only U.S.C. when that matter, resolved were 28 in a ^adequate 2 "reasonable agree different to § 2253(c)(2). jurists that) the manner or deserve This could petition that encouragement the to proceed further.'" Slack v. {quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, No further law or evidence consideration McDaniel, 473, 463 U.S. 880, 893 & n.4 suggests in 529 U.S. this that Pleasant matter. A is 484 (2000) {1983)). entitled certificate to of appealability will be denied. The Clerk is to directed to send a copy of the Memorandum Opinion to Pleasant. Date: Richmond, Virginia ^ /s/ Robert E. Payne Senior United States District Judge
]]>
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.
