Speight v. Nash

208 F. App'x 105
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Speight v. Nash. Read the opinion of the Court — 132 F. App'x 423
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided December 6, 2006·No. No. 06-2841·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

Cearful Speight, Jr. appeals from an order of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, dismissing the petition he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The District Court noted that Speight had previously filed a § 2241 petition raising the same claims, which it had dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and that this Court affirmed on appeal. See Speight v. Nash, D. N.J. Civ. No. 05-[106]*106319(FLW); Speight v. Nash, 132 Fed. Appx. 423 (3d Cir.2005). As this Court has previously affirmed the District Court’s holding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Speight’s arguments, it follows that the District Court similarly lacked jurisdiction to consider the identical arguments brought in the instant petition. We will therefore summarily affirm the District Court’s order.

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

Speight v. Nash, 208 F. App'x 105 (3d Cir. 2006).

208 F. App'x 105 (Speight v. Nash) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Speight v. Nash
132 F. App'x 423 (Third Circuit, 2005)