Barefoot v. Revell ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7478
CHARLES ROBERT BAREFOOT, JR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SARAH REVELL; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
Chief District Judge. (5:10-hc-02030-FL)
Submitted: March 15, 2011 Decided: March 18, 2011
Before MOTZ and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Robert Barefoot, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Robert Barefoot, Jr., appeals the district
court’s order dismissing his filing styled as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241(2006) petition. Because Barefoot was challenging his
conviction and sentence, the court properly concluded that the
pleading was a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. The
court dismissed the action because Barefoot previously sought
relief under § 2255 and he did not have authorization from this
court to file a second or successive such motion. See 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255(h) (West Supp. 2010). We conclude the court
properly dismissed the action. Accordingly, we affirm. We also
note Barefoot has failed to show that he is entitled to
authorization from this court to file a second or successive
§ 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2