United States Fourth Circuit

Application for leave to file a second or successive habeas petition is dismissed as unnecessary. To the extent that petitioner files a habeas petition that includes claims previously denied on the merits, the district court is bound, under Winestock, to provide petitioner with the option of omitting the repetitive claims or having the entire petition treated as second or successive.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/02/2006
• Decided 04/10/2006
• Published 04/10/2006

Judges

• Before WILKINS, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Linda Fang, Third Year Law Student, University of Virginia School of Law, Appellate Litigation Clinic, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Movant.  Donald John Zelenka, Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Respondent.   ON BRIEF:  Neal L. Walters, Hetal Doshi, Third Year Law Student, University of Virginia School of Law, Appellate Litigation Clinic, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Movant.  Henry D. McMaster, Attorney General, John W. McIntosh, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Respondent.