Legal Opinion
Rickey L. Potts v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided April 24, 2000No. 99-1186PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
POSNER, Chief Judge.
The stringent limitations that the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act places on the filing of a second or successive petition for habeas corpus (or its federal prisoner’s counterpart, a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255) make it vital to determine whether a previous petition (or motion) was “the real thing” that ought to subject the petitioner or movant to those limitations. The essential point is that a prisoner is entitled to one unencumbered opportunity to receive a decision on the merits. The polar cases that elucidate this principle are easy: where the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Stewart v. Martinez-VillarealSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Pratt v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1997
- Leantry Benton v. Odie WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- In Re Thomas F. Page, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
- James A. O'COnnOr v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Lewis Altman, Jr., Applicant v. Daniel J. Benik, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
- United States v. EvansCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
- David Thai v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Vitrano v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
- Washington v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.