United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION FOR
HONORABLE PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Darell Benson, (“Petitioner”), filed a petition
for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254,
challenging his conviction for first-degree premeditated
murder, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.316; felon in possession
of a firearm, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224f; and
possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony
(felony-firearm), Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227b. Because
petitioner had challenged these convictions in a prior habeas
petition, this Court ordered that the case be transferred to
the United States Court of Appeals for authorization to file
a successive habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2244(b)(3)(A). Petitioner's case remains pending in the
Sixth Circuit. See In re Benson, U.S.C.A. No.
16-2732. Petitioner has now filed a petition or motion for
reconsideration. For the reasons that follow, the motion is
Court denies petitioner's motion for reconsideration,
because petitioner's case remains pending before the
Sixth Circuit. The Sixth Circuit has yet to grant petitioner
permission to file a second or successive petition or to
issue a ruling that petitioner's current habeas petition
is not a second or successive petition for which
authorization is required, pursuant to § 2244(b)(3)(A).
district court loses jurisdiction over a state prisoner's
habeas petition when it transfers it to Court of Appeals on
the ground that it is a second or successive petition.
Jackson v. Sloan, 800 F.3d 260, 261 (6th Cir. 2015).
This Court thus lacks jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A.
§§ 1631 and 2244(b)(3)(A) to consider
petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the transfer
order. Id., at 261-62.
HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration (Dkt. # 9)