James Michael Terry v. United States

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-11033 February 27, 2007
THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
D. C. Docket Nos.
03-01443 CV-T-23TBM
97-00273-CR-T-2
JAMES MICHAEL TERRY,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
(February 27, 2007)
Before DUBINA and COX, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER,* District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
___________________________
*Honorable Harvey E. Schlesinger, United States District Judge for the Middle District of
Florida, sitting by designation.
After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we affirm the
district court’s order denying Terry’s second 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Under §
2244(b)(4), a district court shall dismiss any claim presented in a second or
successive application that does not meet the requirements set forth in §
2244(b)(2). See, e.g., In re Morris, 328 F.3d 739, 740-41 (5th Cir. 2003) (granting
petitioner’s application for leave to file a successive motion, but noting that the
district court would dismiss petitioner’s motion without reaching the merits if it
determined that the petitioner did not satisfy the requirements in § 2244(b)(2)).
The district court properly concluded that none of Terry’s claims satisfied these
requirements. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.
AFFIRMED.
2