Legal Opinion

In re: Marckson Saint Fleur

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided June 8, 2016No. 16-12299-JPublishedCited by 113 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BY THE PANEL:

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255(h) and 2244(b)(3)(A), Marckson Saint Fleur has filed an application seeking an order authorizing the district, court to consider a second or successive motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal sentence, 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Such authorization may be granted only if this Court certifies that the second or successive motion contains a claim involving:(1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  2. Welch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
  3. Keith Lamont Jordan v. Secretary, DOCCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2007
  4. United States v. OwensCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
  5. In Re: Ricardo Pinder, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2016

3Cited by113 opinions

  1. United States v. Daniel MathisCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019
  2. United States v. Michael St. HubertCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
  3. United States v. GoochCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
  4. In re ColonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2016
  5. Irma Ovalles v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018

108 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