No. 22-600
Gregory Bartko v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: aedpa aedpa-standard brady-claim brady-rule exculpatory-evidence gatekeeping-standard habeas-corpus napue-claim napue-rule panetti-v-quarterman
Latest Conference:
2023-02-17
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is the stringent second-and-successive gatekeeping standard under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b), which some circuits have applied to after-acquired Brady/Napue claims even if the exculpatory evidence was not known at the time of the initial habeas petition, consistent with AEDPA and the Court's decision is Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930, 127 S.Ct. 2842, 168 L.Ed.2d 662 (2007).
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is the stringent gatekeeping standard under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) consistent with AEDPA and Panetti v. Quarterman?
Docket Entries
2023-02-21
Petition DENIED.
2023-02-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023.
2023-01-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-11-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 30, 2023)
Attorneys
Gregory Bartko
Donald F. Samuel — Garland & Samuel, P.C., Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent