Legal Opinion

United States v. Vialva

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided September 14, 2018No. 18-70007; Consolidated With No. 18-70008PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Per curiam

*358Brandon Bernard and Christopher Andre Vialva were convicted of capital murder under federal law and sentenced to death. Both men moved for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6), seeking to reopen their initial habeas proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court concluded that these motions constituted second-or-successive Section 2255 petitions and so dismissed them for lack of jurisdiction. Bernard and Vialva now seek certificates of appealability ("COAs") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). For the reasons set forth below, we DENY the COA applications.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Gonzalez v. CrosbySupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Buck v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
  4. United States v. Brandon Bernard and Christopher Andre VialvaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
  5. Roy Lee Pippin v. Doug Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2005

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. United States v. FieldsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2019
  2. Christopher Andre Vialva v. T. J. WatsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
  3. AMOOP v. GARMANDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
  4. Anderson v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2024
  5. Anderson v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2024

18 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