Topic
Every decision we've filed under Habeas Corpus - Federal Prisoner (28 USC 2255).
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Brian David Hill's appeal from the denial of his federal habeas corpus motion because he failed to obtain a certificate of appealability. The court found that Hill did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as required by statute.
The Tenth Circuit held that defense counsel violated the Sixth Amendment by failing to advise a defendant that his guilty plea to a drug offense would result in practically inevitable deportation. The court reversed the district court's denial of the habeas motion and remanded for a determination of prejudice.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of Marlon Alonzo Smith's motions for the appointment of counsel, ruling that his underlying Rule 60(b) motions were effectively unauthorized successive habeas petitions. Because the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear those motions, the request for counsel to assist with them was rendered moot.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment while declining to review a defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding a safety valve reduction. The court held that while the claim was not barred by issue preclusion, it could not be adjudicated on direct appeal due to insufficient record detail.
The Third Circuit affirmed a 219-month prison sentence for federal carjacking and firearm charges, rejecting the appellant's challenges based on a binding appellate waiver. The court held that while an ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not barred by the waiver, it could not be adjudicated on direct appeal and must be pursued in a collateral proceeding.
The Tenth Circuit enforced a defendant's appeal waiver contained in his plea agreement, dismissing his direct appeal without prejudice. The court clarified that while direct review is barred, the defendant retains the right to seek relief through a collateral proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Ronald Shaw's appeal because he failed to obtain a required certificate of appealability. The court found that Shaw did not make a substantial showing that the district court's denial of his habeas motion was debatable or wrong.
The Third Circuit denied William Kaetz's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to overturn rulings in his federal habeas corpus proceeding. The court characterized Kaetz's arguments as frivolous and clarified that mandamus cannot be used as a substitute for the regular appellate process.
The Fifth Circuit dismissed an appeal challenging a district court's denial of a discovery order in a federal habeas proceeding. The court held that discovery orders are generally not appealable, leaving it without jurisdiction to review the ruling.
The Third Circuit granted counsel's motion to withdraw under Anders v. California, finding that Dayakar Mallu's appeal presented no nonfrivolous issues. The court affirmed Mallu's conviction and downward-varied sentence based on the enforceability of his valid appellate waiver.