Marcellus Charlemagne v. Secretary, Department of Corrections, et al.

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________

No. 20-1 0631
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________

D.C. Docket No. 5:19-cv-00437-RBD-PRL

MARCELLUS CHARLEMAGNE,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent-Appellee .
________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(November 13, 2020)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LAGOA and BRASHER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
USCA11 Case: 20-10631 Date Filed: 11/13/2020 Page: 1 of 2

2

Marcellus Charlemagne, a state prisoner, appeals pro se the dismissal of his
petition for a writ of habeas corpus as second or successive. Charlemagne
abandoned any challenge he could have made to the dismissal of his petition by
raising in his initial brief only arguments about his state conviction. See Timson v.
Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). Charlemagne argues for the first
time in his reply brief that his petition is not second or successive, but “we do not
address arguments raised for the first time in a pro se litigant’s reply brief,” id. We
affirm the dismissal of Charlemagne’s petition.
AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 20-10631 Date Filed: 11/13/2020 Page: 2 of 2