`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
`
`
`No. 24-6913
`
`
`ALEXANDER CAMERON,
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner - Appellant,
`
`v.
`
`
`JASON S. MIYARES, Attorney General,
`
`
`
`
`Respondent - Appellee.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
`Alexandria. Patricia Tolliver Giles, District Judge. (1:24-cv-00847-PTG-IDD)
`
`
`
`
`
`Decided: December 10, 2024
`
`
`
`Submitted: December 5, 2024
`
`
`Before GREGORY and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit
`Judge.
`
`
`Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
`
`
`Alexander Cameron, Appellant Pro Se.
`
`
`Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PER CURIAM:
`
`Alexander Cameron appeals the district court’s order construing his petition for a
`
`writ of mandamus as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and dismissing it as successive and
`
`unauthorized.* We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. See Shoop
`
`v. Twyford, 596 U.S. 811, 820-21 (2022) (explaining that All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651,
`
`cannot be used to circumvent statutory rules governing federal habeas proceedings);
`
`Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 530-32 (2005) (describing when postconviction filing
`
`should be construed as habeas petition); In re Williams, 364 F.3d 235, 238 (4th Cir. 2004)
`
`(recognizing that only court of appeals can grant authorization to file second or successive
`
`§ 2254 petition). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Cameron v. Miyares,
`
`No. 1:24-cv-00847-PTG-IDD (E.D. Va. Aug. 15, 2024). We dispense with oral argument
`
`because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
`
`court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
`
`AFFIRMED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`* A certificate of appealability is not required to review the district court’s order.
`See United States v. McRae, 793 F.3d 392, 400 (4th Cir. 2015).
`
`
`
`2
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
