Legal Opinion
Spitznas v. Boone
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided September 29, 2006No. 19-3207PublishedCited by 240 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
The AEDPA-amended habeas corpus statutes 1 restrict the power of the federal courts to entertain second or successive applications for writs of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244. Before a petitioner may file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in the district court, he must successfully apply to this court for an order authorizing the district court to consider the petition. See id. § 2244(b)(3). 2 A second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion must also be certified by a panel of this comb pursuant to § 2244 before it may proceed in district court. See 28…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Rose v. LundySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Barefoot v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gonzalez v. CrosbySupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Cooper v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by240 opinions
- In Re ClineCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- Johnson v. SpencerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2020
- Fleming v. EvansCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
- Case v. HatchCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
- Arthur Tyler v. Carl AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014
235 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.