IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
March 15, 2013
ROBERT A. EDWARDS,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ludwig, J.
Petitioner's notice of March 7, 2013 ("Petitioner's Notice to File Habeas Corpus") asserts that he is entitled to habeas corpus relief under the recent ruling in Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012). Previously, petitioner had filed several petitions for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (98-CV-1022, 04-CV-5304, 05-CV-6307, 05-CV-6687, and 09-CV-1070). However, under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, a petitioner may not file a second or successive petition for habeas corpus relief without first receiving approval from the Court of Appeals. See Benchoff v. Colleran, 404 F.3d 812, 816 (3d Cir. 2005). Absent such authorization, a district court is not permitted to consider the merits of any subsequent petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); Robinson v. Johnson, 313 F.3d 128, 139-40 (3d Cir. 2002).
Petitioner has not obtained an order from the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit allowing this court to consider the merits of a successive petition.
Accordingly, this court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the proposed petition.*fn1 Robinson, 313 F.3d at 140.
BY THE COURT:
Edmund V. Ludwig, J.