Weidner v. Florida
This text of 260 F. App'x 252 (Weidner v. Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Petitioner Paul A. Weidner, a Florida state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his federal habeas corpus petition, 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The district court dismissed Weidner’s petition as time-barred, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A), but then granted a certificate of appealability (“COA”) as to the underlying constitutional claims raised in the petition.
A federal habeas petitioner must obtain a COA from the district court to appeal the denial of his § 2254 habeas petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). However, “[w]hen a district court dismisses a petition as time-barred, it is inappropriate to grant a COA on the [underlying] constitutional claim.” Ross v. Moore, 246 F.3d 1299, 1300 (11th Cir.2001). As a result, in Ross we vacated the order granting a COA and remanded to the district court “for the limited purpose of considering whether a COA should be granted on the question of whether appellant’s habeas petition is time-barred.” Id.
Here, the facts are identical to Ross. As a result, we vacate the order granting a COA and remand this case to the district court for the limited purpose of considering whether a COA should be granted on the question of whether Weidner’s § 2254 petition is time-barred.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
260 F. App'x 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weidner-v-florida-ca11-2008.