Legal Opinion

Michael Stansell v.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided July 1, 2016No. 15-4244PublishedCited by 149 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SUTTON, Circuit Judge.

Federal law generally gives habeas petitioners one shot to pursue their claims in federal court. For petitions filed after the first one — “second or successive” petitions in the language of the statute — applicants must overcome strict limits before federal courts will permit them to seek habeas relief. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). At issue in today’s case is whether Michael Stan-sell’s habeas petition — filed after the State added a post-release control requirement to his judgment of conviction — is “second or successive” and thus subject to those limits. We hold…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. McCleskey v. ZantSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Burton v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Jones v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Felker v. TurpinSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. State v. FischerOhio Supreme Court · 2010

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by149 opinions

  1. United States v. Frank RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
  2. Uriel Gonzalez v. Stuart ShermanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  3. In re WogenstahlCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
  4. Abulay Nian v. WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
  5. In re Raymond TibbettsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017

144 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API