In re: Robert Hull, Sr. v.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
• Decided: December 27, 2019
• Docket: 19-3133
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

*DLD-054 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________

No. 19-3133 ___________

In re: ROBERT LEE HULL, SR., Petitioner ____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Related to D. Del. Civ. No. 1:00-cv-00087) ____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. November 26, 2019

Before: RESTREPO, PORTER and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: December 27, 2019) _________

OPINION* _________

PER CURIAM

Robert Lee Hull is a Delaware inmate serving a sentence of life imprisonment pursuant to

a conviction that became final 25 years ago. Hull has filed a mandamus petition in this

Court seeking unspecified relief. It appears from the exhibits attached to his petition,

however, that Hull is attempting to challenge his conviction or sentence. That is not a

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. permissible use of mandamus; Hull must instead comply with the procedures for filing

second or successive habeas petitions, set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244. See Samak v.

Warden, FCC Coleman-Medium, 766 F.3d 1271, 1285 (11th Cir. 2014); cf. In re

Dorsainvil, 119 F.3d 245, 251 (3d Cir. 1997) (explaining that inmate may not use habeas

petition under § 2241 simply because he cannot meet AEDPA’s gatekeeping

requirements for second or successive habeas petitions). Accordingly, Hull’s mandamus

petition is denied. His motion for appointment of counsel is dismissed as moot.