Matthew Hollenbeck pleaded guilty in 2017 to aggravated indecent liberties with a child under 14 and was sentenced to life in prison by a Kansas state court. After the Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction, Hollenbeck filed a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in 2025, which the district court dismissed as time-barred. Proceeding pro se, Hollenbeck now seeks authorization from the Tenth Circuit to file a second or successive habeas petition, arguing that his claim relies on a new rule of constitutional law and newly discovered evidence.
The Tenth Circuit explained that federal law permits a second or successive habeas petition only if it falls within one of two narrow categories: it must rely on a new and retroactive rule of constitutional law, or it must allege previously undiscoverable facts that would establish innocence. Hollenbeck argued that his Fourteenth Amendment due process claim was based on a Kansas statute from 2019 and a Kansas Supreme Court case from 2020. The court rejected this, noting that these authorities were available when he filed his first petition in 2025. Furthermore, the court found that these authorities did not satisfy the requirement of being a new rule of constitutional law made retroactive by the Supreme Court, nor did they constitute newly discovered facts sufficient to establish innocence by clear and convincing evidence.
Hollenbeck is barred from filing a second or successive habeas petition based on the arguments he presented. The court's denial is final and cannot be appealed or reviewed via a petition for rehearing or a writ of certiorari. This decision reinforces the strict gatekeeping function of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b), ensuring that successive petitions are limited to truly new legal rules or evidence that could not have been discovered earlier.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download