Name of Assigned Judge Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge Joan B. Gottschall than Assigned Judge
Petitioner's motion for leave to file in forma pauperis  is granted. However, this successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). The case is terminated. Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel  is denied as moot. A copy of Circuit Rule 22.2 is attached to this order.
O [For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.
Jefferson Coleman, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges the denial of his 2007 state-court collateral proceedings related to his 1987 conviction of armed robbery and residential burglary.
Petitioner has demonstrated that he is indigent, and his motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. However, the Court has reviewed the petition and finds that it must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, a habeas petitioner must obtain prior leave from the court of appeals before the district court can consider a second or successive petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Petitioner in the case at bar filed an earlier habeas corpus petition, United States ex rel. Simmons v. Gilmore, Case No. 98 C 8255 (N.D. Ill.). Petitioner has filed an earlier habeas corpus petition, Coleman v. Page, Case No. 94 C 7602. The first habeas petition was denied on the merits on November 27, 1995. Coleman v. Page, 905 F. Supp. 548 (N.D. Ill. 1995) (Alesia, J.). Petitioner also filed a second habeas petition, Coleman v. Evans, Case No. 05 C 1288. Petitioner's second habeas petition was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on March 17, 2005. Petitioner filed the instant suit, his third habeas corpus petition in this court, but makes no showing that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has granted him leave to file a successive habeas corpus petition. The Court therefore has no jurisdiction to consider the Petitioner's renewed application for habeas corpus relief under § 2254. See Harris v. Cotton, 296 F.3d 578, 579 (7th Cir. 2002) (subsequent habeas petition challenging loss of good-time credits constituted second/successive habeas petition); Nunez v. United States, 96 F.3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996); In re Page, 170 F.3d 659 (7th Cir. 1999).
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Petitioner's motion for leave to file in forma pauperis but summarily dismisses the habeas corpus petition without prejudice to re-filing suit should the Petitioner obtain leave to file from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Petitioner also filed a motion for appointment of counsel. In light of the Court's lack of jurisdiction, this motion is denied as moot.
Attached to this order is a copy of Circuit Rule 22.2. Circuit Rule 22.2 explains the procedures Petitioner must follow to obtain leave from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition.
Circuit Rule 22.2. Successive Petitions for ...