In re: Kenneth Smith v.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Kenneth Smith filed in the district court a numerically second petition for a writ of habeas corpus that he claims is not “second or successive” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) because the claims included in the petition are newly ripe. The district court, uncertain whether the petition was “second or successive,” transferred the case to us to decide that question in the first instance. We decline to do so.
A district court has jurisdiction to consider numerically second petitions that are not “second or successive” petitions within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) and needs…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Burton v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Panetti v. QuartermanSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Magwood v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Stewart v. Martinez-VillarealSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- In Re Jonathan Sims, Janice v. TerbushCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
3Cited by64 opinions
- Askew v. BradshawCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
- Ajamu v. Warden Belmont Correctional InstitutionDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2022
- Bernard 536729 v. KingDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2025
- Bevins v. Warden, Madison Correctional InstitutionDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2020
- Bonnell v. McBeeDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2023
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.