Weidner v. Florida

260 F. App'x 252
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided January 3, 2008·No. No. 07-10611·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

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

Weidner v. Florida, 260 F. App'x 252 (11th Cir. 2008).

260 F. App'x 252 (Weidner v. Florida) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bobby B. Ross v. Michael Moore
246 F.3d 1299 (Eleventh Circuit, 2001)