Court Opinion

ID: 9381478
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-22 21:01:25.982197+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:32.813907
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7434      Doc: 11         Filed: 03/21/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-7434

        CHARLES CLAUDE RAMSEY,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        KIMBERLY H. RUNION, Director of the Virginia Center for Behavioral
        Rehabilitation,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Senior District Judge. (2:11-cv-00396-RBS-FBS)

        Submitted: March 16, 2023                                         Decided: March 21, 2023

        Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Charles Claude Ramsey, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7434       Doc: 11         Filed: 03/21/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Charles Claude Ramsey seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his

        self-styled motion to strike, which he filed 10 years after the district court denied relief on

        his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and closed the case. We construe Ramsey’s underlying

        motion to strike as a second or successive § 2254 petition or, alternatively, a Fed. R. Civ.

        P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the denial of his initial § 2254 petition. Because

        Ramsey did not obtain prefiling authorization from this court to file such a motion, the

        district court lacked jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); United States v. McRae,

        793 F.3d 392, 397-400 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability

        as unnecessary, see Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009), vacate the district court’s

        order, and remand with instructions for the district court to dismiss the motion for lack of

        jurisdiction. We deny Ramsey’s motion to strike filed in this court and dispense with oral

        argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

        before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                      VACATED AND REMANDED

                                                      2