William Lee Anderson, II v. Warden Kevin McCoy

Opinion

CLERK'S OFFICE U.S. DIST. COL AT ROANOKE, VA FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT oe FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA jv. ROANOKE DIVISION st Beeson □□

WILLIAM LEE ANDERSON, II, ) ) Petitioner, ) Case No. 7:25CV00718 ) V. ) OPINION ) WARDEN KEVIN MCCOY, ) JUDGE JAMES P. JONES ) Respondent. ) ) William Lee Anderson, II, Pro Se Petitioner. The petitioner, William Lee Anderson, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Despite Anderson filing the petition on a state court form, I will construe it as filed in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Anderson challenges his 2009 convictions in the Circuit Court of Washington County, Virginia, for bank robbery and obstruction of justice. I find that the petition is successive and must be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). Anderson has filed prior unsuccessful state and federal habeas petitions. In the present petition, Anderson asserts claims regarding conduct by the judge, attorneys, clerk, and court reporter regarding their alleged collusion and conspiracy

to commit fraud by failing to provide him with certain court records.1 Pet. 4–5, Dkt. No. 1. However, I cannot consider the merits of Anderson’s claims.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244, a federal district court may consider a successive § 2254 petition if the petitioner moves the appropriate appellate court for an order authorizing the district court to consider the application. § 2244(b)(3)(A).

Anderson has previously filed more than one § 2254 petition in this court concerning the same convictions and sentence. Anderson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 7:25CV00433 (W.D. Va. Oct. 2, 2025) (dismissing § 2254 petition as successive), appeal docketed, No. 25-6904 (4th Cir. Oct. 21, 2025); Anderson v. Dir. of Dep’t of

Corr., No. 7:12CV00323 (W.D. Va. Aug. 8, 2012) (dismissing § 2254 petition as untimely), appeal dismissed, 502 F. App’x 261, 262 (4th Cir. 2012) (unpublished). There is no evidence that the petitioner has obtained a certification from the Fourth

Circuit Court of Appeals to file a successive § 2254 petition. Therefore, I must dismiss this action without prejudice. A separate Final Order will be entered herewith.

1 Anderson further asserts that Green Rock Correctional Center Property Sgt. Pope sabotaged his court documents and he has been prevented access to the courts. Pet. 4–5, Dkt. No. 1. As evidence, Anderson attached to the Petition a Property Disposition form by which Anderson authorized the destruction of certain property, including a legal pad, hygiene products, and eating utensils. Id. at Attach. 2, Dkt. No. 1-1. To the extent that Anderson is attempting to challenge the conditions of his confinement, a petition filed under § 2254 is not the proper vehicle for making such claims and thus will not be considered. DATED: January 5, 2026

/s/ JAMES P. JONES Senior United States District Judge