Legal Opinion
Castro v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided December 15, 2003No. 02-6683PublishedCited by 1,175 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Breyer
Under a longstanding practice, a court sometimes treats as a request for habeas relief under 28 U. S. C. § 2255 a motion that a pro se federal prisoner has labeled differently. Such recharacterization can have serious consequences for the prisoner, for it subjects any subsequent motion under § 2255 to the restrictive conditions that federal law imposes upon a “second or successive” (but not upon a first) federal habeas motion. §2255, ¶ 8. In light of these consequences, we hold that the court cannot so recharacterize a pro se litigant’s motion as the litigant’s first §2255 motion unless the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Hughes v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- McNabb v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Felker v. TurpinSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,175 opinions
- Kelley Mala v. Crown Bay MarinaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Burton v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Panetti v. QuartermanSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Eric Martin v. William OvertonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Pliler v. FordSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
1,170 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.