Arrington v. Schnell
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:20-cv-02539
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Arrington v. Schnell, Judge Wright dismissed Arrington’s successive habeas petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and did not issue an appeal certificate.
Gideon C. Arrington, II, whose successive habeas case was dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction; Schnell was the named respondent.
What happened
In Arrington v. Schnell, Gideon C. Arrington, II challenged a recommendation to dismiss his successive petition asking the court to review his state custody. He asked the court to transfer the petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, but that court had already denied authorization to file the petition.
Arrington argued that there was not enough evidence to prove his guilt and that he could not reasonably have discovered that Minnesota allegedly relied on false evidence. The court found that his objections did not identify an error in the recommendation or explain why he could not have discovered the alleged facts earlier.
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright overruled Arrington’s objections, adopted the recommendation, and dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The court also ruled that a certificate allowing an appeal would not issue.
The detailed version
- Arrington v. Schnell · No. 0:20-cv-02539
- Wilhelmina Wright
- June 24, 2021
Background
The court considered a February 16, 2021 report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. The recommendation was to dismiss Gideon C. Arrington, II’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and not issue a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is a court document required for a habeas petitioner to appeal in many circumstances. Arrington represented himself and filed timely objections.
The opinion states that the petition was an undisputed second or successive petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Section 2244(b)(3)(A) requires authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit before such a petition may proceed. The Eighth Circuit denied Arrington’s request for authorization on April 5, 2021.
Objections
Arrington disputed the recommendation’s conclusions about dismissing the petition or transferring it to the Eighth Circuit. He argued that there was insufficient evidence proving his guilt. The district court found that neither Arrington nor the court identified a legal or factual error in the recommendation’s analysis, so it overruled that objection.
Arrington also argued that he should not have been expected to know or discover that Minnesota allegedly relied on false evidence in his case. The court found that his objections did not explain why he could not have discovered the factual basis for that claim earlier through due diligence, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(B)(i). The court therefore overruled that objection as well.
Because Arrington did not specifically object to the remaining parts of the recommendation, the court reviewed those parts for clear error and found none.
Ruling
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright overruled Arrington’s objections and adopted the February 16, 2021 report and recommendation. The court dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue. The opinion did not decide whether Arrington’s underlying claims about his conviction or the alleged false evidence were meritorious.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.