Case Name: James McCONICO, Jr., Appellant v. U.S. CONGRESS, et al., Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-13
Citations: 208 F. App'x 10
Docket Number: No. 06-5123
Parties: James McCONICO, Jr., Appellant v. U.S. CONGRESS, et al., Appellees.
Judges: BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and HENDERSON and TATEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 208
Pages: 10–11

Head Matter:
This case was not selected for publication in the Federal Reporter
James McCONICO, Jr., Appellant v. U.S. CONGRESS, et al., Appellees.
No. 06-5123.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Dec. 13, 2006.
James McConico, Jr., Bessemer, AL, pro se.
BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and HENDERSON and TATEL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM.
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's order filed March 23, 2006 be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed appellant's action on the ground that the Supreme Court has held that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's restrictions on second or successive habeas petitions "do not amount to a 'suspension' of the writ contrary to Article I, § 9." Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 664, 116 S.Ct. 2333, 135 L.Ed.2d 827 (1996).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.