Court Opinion

ID: 9642512
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 18:01:16.942719+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:08:51.877597
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50557        Document: 00516867534             Page: 1      Date Filed: 08/22/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50557
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                                August 22, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Carl Wayne Wiley,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 2:14-CR-922-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Clement, Southwick, and Higginson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Carl Wayne Wiley, Texas prisoner # 2156916, moves this court for
   leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal of the district court’s
   order denying his motion to furnish documents under 28 U.S.C. § 2250. He
   also moves for appointment of counsel and for authorization to file a

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50557      Document: 00516867534           Page: 2     Date Filed: 08/22/2023

                                     No. 22-50557

   successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. These motions are
   DENIED.
          At the threshold, insofar as Wiley seeks to appeal a discovery order,
   we lack jurisdiction over his appeal. See Goodman v. Harris Cnty., 443 F.3d
   464, 467 (5th Cir. 2006) (“This circuit has held that discovery orders are
   generally not appealable.”).
          By moving for leave to proceed IFP on appeal, Wiley is challenging
   the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. See
   Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Our inquiry into whether
   the appeal is taken in good faith “is limited to whether the appeal involves
   ‘legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).’”
   Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (citation omitted). Courts
   in this circuit have entertained appeals from orders denying relief under
   § 2250, which entitles an indigent petitioner “to court documents at no cost”
   if he has a § 2255 application pending. United States v. Agbomire, 239 F. App’x
   929, 929 (5th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (unpublished); see United States v.
   Hernandez-Cuellar, No. 21-40051, 2021 WL 4484963, at *1 (5th Cir. Sept.
   30, 2021) (per curiam) (unpublished); Walton v. Davis, 730 F. App’x 233, 234
   (5th Cir. 2018) (per curiam) (unpublished); United States v. Ramos-Barrera,
   466 F. App’x 334, 335 (5th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (unpublished). Wiley
   previously filed an unsuccessful 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition challenging his
   federal sentence. But at the time Wiley filed a letter in the district court
   invoking § 2250 and “requesting copies of the Court[’]s [d]iscovery,” no
   application for habeas relief was pending.         Accordingly, this appeal is
   frivolous, and Wiley’s motion to proceed IFP is denied.
          Construed liberally, Wiley’s brief seeks authorization to file a
   successive § 2255 motion. To obtain authorization to file a successive
   petition, Wiley must make a prima facie showing that his claims rely on either

                                               2
Case: 22-50557     Document: 00516867534          Page: 3   Date Filed: 08/22/2023

                                   No. 22-50557

   “newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the
   evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing
   evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found [him] guilty of the
   offense” or “a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on
   collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.” 28
   U.S.C. § 2255(h)(1)-(2). Wiley has not made such a showing.
         For those reasons, Wiley’s motions to proceed IFP, for appointment
   of counsel, and for authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion are
   DENIED.

                                            3