Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_16-cv-00096/USCOURTS-ared-5_16-cv-00096-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

PINE BLUFF DIVISION

COCHISE MILES 

ADC #119012 PETITIONER 

 

VS. 5:16CV00096 BRW/JTR 

WENDY KELLEY, Director, 

Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT 

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

 The following Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) has been 

sent to United States District Judge Billy Roy Wilson. You may file written 

objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections 

must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and 

(2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of the entry of 

this Recommendation. The failure to timely file objections may result in waiver of 

the right to appeal questions of fact. 

Case 5:16-cv-00096-BRW Document 4 Filed 04/06/16 Page 1 of 3
2 

I. Background 

 Pending before the Court is a § 2254 habeas Petition filed by Petitioner, 

Cochise Miles (“Miles”).1 Doc. 1. In his Petition, he raises a habeas claim 

attacking his 2000 convictions for capital murder and aggravated robbery. 

 On July 26, 2006, Miles filed a § 2254 habeas action in the Eastern District 

of Arkansas, challenging the same convictions. Miles v. Norris, E.D. Ark. No. 

4:06CV00862 BRW. On May 9, 2008, United States District Judge Billy Roy 

Wilson dismissed that case, with prejudice. Id. at docs. 15 and 16. On September 

16, 2008, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a certificate of appealability. 

Miles v. Morris, 8th Cir. slip op. No. 08-2301 (Sep. 16, 2008). 

 On March 28, 2016, Miles initiated the current habeas action. Doc. 2. For 

the reasons discussed below, the Court recommends that this action be dismissed, 

without prejudice. 

II. Discussion 

 This is a successive § 2254 habeas action challenging Miles’ 2000 state 

convictions. Only the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has the authority to grant 

permission to file such a successive § 2254 habeas action. See 28 U.S.C. § 

2244(b)(3)(A) (“Before a second or successive application permitted by this 

section is filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate 

 1

 Miles has also filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Doc. 1. Based on the financial 

information provided, he is eligible to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Case 5:16-cv-00096-BRW Document 4 Filed 04/06/16 Page 2 of 3
3 

court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider the 

application.”). Until Miles obtains the required authorization from the Eighth 

Circuit, this Court lacks jurisdiction to proceed. Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147, 

152-53, 157 (2007). 

III. Conclusion

 IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT: 

 1. Miles’ Motion to Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (doc. 1) be 

GRANTED. 

 2. Miles’ 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. 2) 

be DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, so that he may seek authorization from 

the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), to file 

a successive habeas petition. It is further recommended that a Certificate of 

Appealability be DENIED pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 

2254 Cases 

 Dated this 6th day of April, 2016. 

 

 ____________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

 

Case 5:16-cv-00096-BRW Document 4 Filed 04/06/16 Page 3 of 3