Barney A. Dunlap v. David Mitchell, Superintendent, Lanesboro Correctional Institution
1. Since the U.S, District Court has Subsequently Confirmed that, the Not/ce .
oF Appeal in question was, im fact, timely Filed, Should the Court
of Appeals Fourth Cireult's DISPOSITION on the notice of appeal
issue be Vacated ?°
2% Should a pre se appeHant be not) fied by district court that , fe
appellant's motion , brief , or petition Aas been reclassified fo a
notice of appeal 7 .
3 Whether the Court of Appeals Should notity a pro se appellant that
thelr motion, brief, or petipion must address the court's expected
Subsect matter of a reclass/fied document prior to Filing 4
DISPOSITION ?
4 Does collateral estoppel Classify as an impediment that prevents
Filing, /n the Context of § 2244 (d)(Il28) ?
5 When Coflateral estoppel via procedural default cloctrine 1s enforced.
cdluring direet appeal /n a criminal Case, Should /? preclude 4
pro se, indigent appellant From Mtg ating an (nekbeetive 0551's tane
of Counsel Claim on appellate Counsel ?
Whether the Court of Appeals' disposition on the notice of appeal issue should be vacated