United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Florida

William Alexander Townsend, 

Petitioner,

v.

Mark S. Inch, Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 20-23118-Civ-Scola

Order Dismissing Successive Habeas Petition

This matter is before the Court on an independent review of the record. 

For the reasons set forth below, the Court dismisses the Petitioner William 

Townsend’s § 2254 petition (ECF No. 1) as a successive habeas petition under

28 § 2244(b)(3). 

1. Background

Townsend, a pro se inmate currently confined at Hamilton Correctional 

Institution-Annex, has filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1.) He challenges the constitutionality of his 

conviction and sentence, entered following a jury trial in Miami-Dade County 

Circuit Court, case number F97-007241. (Id.)

Previously, Townsend filed a § 2254 petition in the Southern District of 

Florida challenging his conviction entered in Miami-Dade County circuit court 

case no. F97-007241. See Townsend v. Crews, 14-24126-CV-MORENO, ECF No. 

1 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 4, 2014). The magistrate judge issued a report addressing the 

merits of the petition and recommending it be denied as untimely. (Id. at ECF 

No. 8). The district judge entered an order adopting the report and denying the 

petition on the merits. (Id. at ECF No. 13). Townsend did not appeal the denial.

Townsend has now filed this, his second § 2254 petition. (See ECF No. 1).

This petition challenges the same conviction addressed in the prior petition. (Id.)

Although the petition is captioned as if it were intended to be filed in Florida’s 

Third District Court of Appeal, Townsend invokes 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as the basis 

for his petition, and he is seeking relief pursuant to § 2254. (ECF No. 1 at 1.) 

Townsend has not alleged that has applied for leave to file this successive petition

from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals as required by § 2244(b)(3) (requiring 

Case 1:20-cv-23118-RNS Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/06/2020 Page 1 of 3
a petitioner to obtain an order from the appropriate court of appeals for an order 

authorizing the filing of a successive petition).

2. Discussion

As explained above, Townsend filed a prior § 2254 petition challenging the 

same state court conviction challenged here. In this § 2254 petition, he is 

asserting new claims attacking that same conviction. (See ECF No. 1).

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), “[b]efore a second or 

successive application permitted by this section is filed in the district court, the 

applicant shall move in the appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing 

the district court to consider the application.” See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); 

Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 656-57 (1996). “A motion in the court of appeals 

for an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive 

application shall be determined by a three-judge panel of the court of appeals” 

and may be granted “only if [the assigned panel of judges] determines that the 

application makes a prima facie showing that the application satisfies the 

requirements of [28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)].” See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(B) and (C). 

Without authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, this Court 

lacks jurisdiction to consider a successive petition. See 28 U.S.C. §2244(b)(2)-

(3); Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147, 153 (2007) (district court was “without 

jurisdiction to entertain” a successive petition where the petitioner did not first 

obtain authorization); El-Amin v. United States, 172 F. App’x 942, 946 (11th Cir. 

2006) (without authorization, the district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a 

second or successive motion). Here, Townsend has not obtained leave from the 

Eleventh Circuit to file this successive petition, and therefore, the Court must 

dismiss this successive petition for lack of jurisdiction.

3. Conclusion

In sum, the Court dismisses the Petitioner William Townsend’s petition 

for habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) for lack of jurisdiction for failing to obtain 

authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals required by 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2244(b)(3). The Court does not issue a certificate of appealability. The Court 

directs the Clerk to close the case and mail a copy of this order to the address 

listed below. Any pending motions will be denied as moot.

Case 1:20-cv-23118-RNS Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/06/2020 Page 2 of 3
Done and ordered at Miami, Florida, on August 6, 2020.

________________________________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge

cc:

William Alexander Townsend

#454325

Hamilton Correctional Institution-Annex

Inmate Mail/Parcels

10650 SW 46th Street

Jasper, FL 32052

PRO SE

Case 1:20-cv-23118-RNS Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/06/2020 Page 3 of 3