No. 18-6992

Brandon Bernard v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-12-11
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Amici (1)IFP
Tags: certificate-of-appealability civil-rights death-penalty due-process federal-courts habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel judicial-bias judicial-misconduct judicial-misconduct-allegations standing
Latest Conference: 2020-01-10
Related Cases: 18-1222 (Vide)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Did the Fifth Circuit err in its reading of Gonzalez , given that five other
Circuits read Gonzalez to allow Rule 60(b) motions to remedy a wide range
of procedural defects in habeas proceedings , similar to the one alleged by
Petitioner here?

2. If a presiding judg e's unfitness qualifies as the sort of "defect in the
integrity of the federal habeas proceedings" that would support a Rule
60(b) motion under Gonzalez , may a reviewing court in determining that
motion consider the reasonableness of th at judge's prior dis position of the
movant's claims for relief?

3. Did the Fifth Circuit , which to date has never identified any debatable
issue in any post -conviction appeal by a death -sentenced federal prisoner,
err in denying a COA concerning the district court's application of Gonzalez
to Petitioner's Rule 60(b) motion ?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Fifth Circuit erred in its reading of Gonzalez v. Crosby, allowing Rule 60(b) motions to remedy procedural defects in habeas proceedings

Docket Entries

2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-19
Reply of petitioner Brandon Bernard filed. (Distributed)
2019-10-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 6, 2019.
2019-10-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 1, 2019 to December 6, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 1, 2019.
2019-10-02
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 7, 2019 to November 1, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-08-01
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including October 7, 2019.
2019-07-31
Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 2, 2019 to October 7, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-06-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including August 2, 2019.
2019-06-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 21, 2019 to August 2, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-05-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including June 21, 2019.
2019-05-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 17, 2019 to June 21, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-03-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 17, 2019.
2019-03-26
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 28, 2019 to May 17, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-02-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 28, 2019.
2019-02-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 11, 2019 to March 28, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-01-10
Brief amicus curiae of The Ethics Bureau at Yale filed.
2019-01-08
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Brandon Bernard.
2019-01-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 11, 2019.
2019-01-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 10, 2019 to February 11, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-12-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 10, 2019)

Attorneys

Brandon Bernard
Robert Charles OwenLaw Office of Robert C. Owen, LLC, Petitioner
The Ethics Bureau at Yale
Lawrence J. FoxYale Law School, Amicus
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent