Willie Carter v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
Petitioner Willie Carter, pro se, moves pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) for an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive motion for a writ of habeas corpus brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We write to clarify that the denial of an initial § 2255 motion on grounds of procedural default (ie., for failure to raise a claim on direct appeal, which failure is not excused by a showing of cause and prejudice) constitutes a disposition on the merits, such that any subsequent § 2255 motion will require authorization pursuant to §§ 2255 and 2244(b)(3)(A). Furthermore,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- McCleskey v. ZantSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Felker v. TurpinSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Stewart v. Martinez-VillarealSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Aparicio v. ArtuzCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Aparicio v. ArtuzCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Marcus Graham v. Joseph M. Costello, Esq., SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- In Re: Benedict Joseph Cook, Iii, MovantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
- James Harvey v. Robert F. Horan, Jr., Commonwealth's Attorney, County of Fairfax, Jennifer Thompson Karen R. Pomer Jeri Elster, Amici CuriaeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2002
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.