Wallace v. Louisiana State

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedDecember 21, 2023
Docket23-30687
StatusUnpublished

This text of Wallace v. Louisiana State (Wallace v. Louisiana State) 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
Wallace v. Louisiana State, (5th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

Case: 23-30687 Document: 00517010042 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/21/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-30687 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ December 21, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Charles K. Wallace, Clerk

Petitioner—Appellant,

versus

Louisiana State,

Respondent—Appellee. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:23-CV-5242 ______________________________

Before Jones, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Charles K. Wallace, Louisiana prisoner # 093248, appeals the district court’s order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition as an unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application and transferring it to this court. He additionally moves for the appointment of counsel.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-30687 Document: 00517010042 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/21/2023

No. 23-30687

Wallace first argues that the district court improperly construed his § 2241 petition as a § 2254 application. Given that Wallace’s § 2241 petition challenged the validity of his second degree murder conviction, the district court properly construed the petition as filed pursuant to § 2254. See Hartfield v. Osborne, 808 F.3d 1066, 1071-73 (5th Cir. 2015). Our review of Wallace’s remaining arguments likewise show no error. Given that Wallace’s constructive § 2254 application challenged the validity of the same second degree murder conviction that he challenged in his prior § 2254 application, the district court correctly determined that the application was successive. See Leal Garcia v. Quarterman, 573 F.3d 214, 220-21 (5th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the district court’s transfer order is AFFIRMED. Wallace’s motion for the appointment of counsel is DENIED.

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

Related

Leal Garcia v. Quarterman
573 F.3d 214 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
Hartfield v. Osborne
808 F.3d 1066 (Fifth Circuit, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Wallace v. Louisiana State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-louisiana-state-ca5-2023.