Legal Opinion

In Re Charles Blackshire

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided October 16, 1996No. 96-1191PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Per curiam

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255 and 2244(b)(3)(A), as amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Charles Blackshire applies for an order authorizing the district court to consider a second motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. Because we find that Blaekshire’s second motion does not contain a claim which relies on a new rule of constitutional law, we deny his application.

Under the recently amended statutes, federal prisoners who want to file a second or successive motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence must move the court of appeals for an…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bailey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. United States v. AndradeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. In Re Ocsulis DorsainvilCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
  2. In Re Avery W. Vial, MovantCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
  3. Ben Gary Triestman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
  4. United States v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1997
  5. In re: Marvin GriffinCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2016

27 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