Alexander Cameron v. JASON S. MIYARES, Attorney General

UNPUBLISHED
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)
Submitted: December 5, 2024 Decided: December 10, 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
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 of 2 --