Summary
This district court order addresses a successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by petitioner Michael Andrew Kitchen challenging his state criminal sentence. Because the petition requires preauthorization from the Court of Appeals under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, the district court lacks jurisdiction to consider it or the petitioner's pending motions. Consequently, the court orders the transfer of the habeas petition to the Sixth Circuit and denies the pending motions without prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Kitchen's present § 2254 petition was a second or successive habeas petition requiring prior authorization from the Sixth Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).
- Whether the existence of later Supreme Court decisions concerning juvenile sentencing removes the petition from the second-or-successive requirements of AEDPA.
- Whether the district court retained jurisdiction to consider Kitchen's pending motion to amend and motion for expedited consideration and limited discovery after transferring the successive petition.
Holdings
- Because Kitchen previously sought and was denied federal habeas relief and filed the present petition without authorization from the Sixth Circuit, the petition is a second or successive petition requiring preauthorization under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).
- The fact that Kitchen relies on later Supreme Court decisions, including Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama, does not remove his petition from § 2244(b)'s second-or-successive requirements.
- After transferring the successive habeas petition to the Sixth Circuit, the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Kitchen's pending motion to amend and motion for expedited consideration and limited discovery; those motions were denied without prejudice.
Key quotations
“The petition still counts as a “second or successive” one requiring preauthorization from the Sixth Circuit.”
“A district court loses jurisdiction over a state prisoner’s habeas petition when it transfers it to Court of Appeals on the ground that it is a second or successive petition.”
Factual background
Kitchen was convicted in Michigan in 1987 of armed robbery, first-degree criminal sexual conduct, and other offenses and received a 42-to-60-year sentence. He was seventeen when he committed the offenses. After a prior federal habeas petition was dismissed with prejudice, Kitchen pursued additional state post-conviction proceedings and a § 1983 action challenging the juvenile sentence. He then filed the present § 2254 petition asserting constitutional challenges to his sentence and related post-conviction proceedings.
Procedural history
Kitchen was convicted in Michigan state court in 1987, and his convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. His first federal habeas petition was dismissed with prejudice in 2003, and the Sixth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability in 2004. After pursuing state post-conviction relief and a related § 1983 action concerning his juvenile sentence, Kitchen filed the present successive habeas petition without Sixth Circuit authorization. The district court transferred the petition to the Sixth Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 and denied pending motions without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Remand instructions
The Clerk was ordered to transfer the habeas petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631. The pending motions were denied without prejudice.