No. 18-8215

Blake Sandlain v. C. Johnson, Warden

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-03-04
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights due-process federal-jurisdiction free-speech maritime standing state-statutes takings
Latest Conference: 2019-04-12
Question Presented (from Petition)

DOES USiNg 2aSS(h)(2) SEcONd OR SUCCESSive
ON HOw the couRt of appeals Retuin JuRisdiction
to heaR Second OR Successive Petition's depRive
PetitioNeR's of due pRocess, WHeN it's UsEd oN the
224 SaviNg Clause ON How the DistRiet CouRt Retain
JuRisdiction to heak the dat Saving Cluse?

Does the Ruling of Mathis(zole) implicats the validity of a Sentence enhaNcemeNt for the purpuse of
2241 Saving Clause, OR does the Ruling of Muthis (ul)
pRohibits Certuin Conduct Covered by state Statutes
to be used in the fedeRal Jurisdiction?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the right of maritime states implicate the validity of the Assente Amendment for the purpose of banning certain cases, or was the validity of maritime delicts covered by state statutes to be used in the federal jurisdiction?

Docket Entries

2019-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-19
Waiver of right of respondent C. Johnson, Warden to respond filed.
2019-02-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 3, 2019)

Attorneys

Blake Sandlain
Blake Sandlain — Petitioner
C. Johnson, Warden
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent