Herbert Butler v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden

685 F. App'x 327
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 13, 2017
Docket16-30312
StatusUnpublished

This text of 685 F. App'x 327 (Herbert Butler v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Herbert Butler v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden, 685 F. App'x 327 (5th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Herbert Butler, Louisiana prisoner # 124959, was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He moves for a certificate of appeala-bility (“COA”) and for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) to challenge the denial of his motion for permission to file a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) motion. That proposed motion sought to challenge a state appellate court’s finding that Butler had failed to preserve a particular issue for review on direct appeal.

Because the proposed motion does not address any aspect of the denial of Butler’s

28 U.S.C. § 2254 application, it raises new claims, so it is a successive Section 2254 application. See Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 532-33, 125 S.Ct. 2641, 162 L.Ed.2d 480 (2005). Because Butler did not have this court’s permission to file a second or successive application, the district court did not have jurisdiction to consider it. See In re Sepulvado, 707 F.3d 550, 556 (5th Cir. 2013). Therefore, the appeal is DISMISSED. See United States v. Key, 205 F.3d 773, 774-75 (5th Cir. 2000).

To the extent that Butler is required to obtain a COA, his request is DENIED, because he has not made “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000). Accordingly, his motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal also is DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Key
205 F.3d 773 (Fifth Circuit, 2000)
Slack v. McDaniel
529 U.S. 473 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Gonzalez v. Crosby
545 U.S. 524 (Supreme Court, 2005)
In Re: Christopher Sepulvado
707 F.3d 550 (Fifth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
685 F. App'x 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herbert-butler-v-darrel-vannoy-warden-ca5-2017.