Topic
Every decision we've filed under Habeas Corpus - Federal Prisoner (28 USC 2255).
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed Cheddie Lamar Griffin's appeal from his § 2255 motion denial because his notice of appeal was filed after the statutory deadline. Although the prison mailbox rule applied, the filing date of March 10 missed the 60-day window that expired on March 4.
The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's dismissal of a federal prisoner's habeas motion, excusing procedural default due to ineffective assistance of counsel. The panel held that the defendant's prior Nevada conviction was not a qualifying controlled substance offense under the Sentencing Guidelines, necessitating resentencing without the career offender enhancement.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se prisoner's complaint, holding that district courts must construe pleadings liberally but are not required to act as legal advocates. The court determined the plaintiff's essential grievance was an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference, not an Americans with Disabilities Act claim.
The Tenth Circuit denied Kimberly Chancellor's request for a certificate of appealability because he failed to show that reasonable jurists would find the district court's procedural ruling debatable. The court held that his Rule 60(b)(6) motion was substantively an unauthorized second or successive § 2255 claim, which the district court correctly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The Tenth Circuit denied Lance Roark a certificate of appealability, ruling that he failed to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists could debate the denial of his constitutional rights. The court affirmed that the federal government possesses Article III standing to prosecute criminal violations of its laws, regardless of the specific injury to a private victim.
The Fourth Circuit denied Edward Dane Jeffus's petition for a writ of mandamus because the underlying dispute was already resolved by the district court. The appellate court found no live controversy remained to justify judicial intervention.
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal sua sponte because the petitioner's notice of appeal was filed two days after the statutory deadline. The court lacks jurisdiction to review the district court's denial of the § 2255 motion due to this untimeliness.
The Tenth Circuit dismissed Marlon Alonzo Smith's appeal because he failed to obtain a required certificate of appealability. The court held that Smith's motion to update his presentence report was an unauthorized second or successive habeas petition that the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear.
The Third Circuit affirmed the denial of a § 2255 motion challenging an asylee's convictions for perjury and immigration fraud based on false oral statements. The court held that while the immigration fraud statute does not apply to oral statements, the appellant failed to preserve this specific challenge for direct appeal, and thus no plain error existed to warrant relief.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to suppress self-incriminating statements made by a public employee during a criminal investigation. The court held that the defendant failed to prove he subjectively believed, or that such a belief was objectively reasonable, that he faced termination for refusing to speak to law enforcement.