Legal Opinion

United States v. Francis Edward Springfield

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided July 29, 2003No. 03-8010PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HARTZ, Circuit Judge.

This matter comes before the panel on petitioner-appellant Francis Edward Springfield’s “Motion to Correct Order and Judgement [sic],” which we construe as a petition for rehearing. Because the denial by this court of an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 cannot be the subject of a petition for rehearing, we strike the implied petition for rehearing filed by Mr. Springfield. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E). The court, however, sua sponte vacates its order and judgment in this matter filed on June 3, 2003, see Triestman v. United States,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  3. Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. Gryger v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. Ben Gary Triestman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Jones v. Secretary, Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2010
  2. United States v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2022
  3. Mallish v. RaemischCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016
  4. Carrillo v. ZupanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
  5. Barnett v. Oklahoma State ofDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2021

16 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