Lacy v. Petrucci

Background

Stephen Arthur Lacy, a person incarcerated at F.C.I. Otisville, filed a self-represented petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He challenged the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence entered in his federal criminal case in the Western District of North Carolina.

Earlier filings

The court explained that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is generally the proper procedure for a federal prisoner challenging a conviction or sentence. Lacy had previously filed a § 2255 motion that the Western District of North Carolina denied on the merits. He later received permission from the Fourth Circuit to file a second or successive § 2255 motion; that motion, which sought relief under Johnson v. United States, was denied. The Fourth Circuit later denied another request for permission to file a successive § 2255 motion. When Lacy filed this action, another request for permission was pending in the Fourth Circuit.

Court’s reasoning

The court stated that an application is “second or successive” when an earlier motion was decided on the merits. Because Lacy had filed two § 2255 motions that were decided on the merits, the court recharacterized the current filing as a successive § 2255 motion. Before such a motion may be filed in a district court, the prisoner must obtain authorization from the appropriate court of appeals. Lacy had not indicated that he had received that authorization.

Disposition

The court transferred the successive § 2255 motion to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1631, stating that successive motions should be transferred to the appropriate appeals court in the interest of justice. The order closed the district-court action. The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, so permission to appeal without prepaying fees was denied.