No. 24-7234

In Re David Diehl

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2025-05-16
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: district-court-jurisdiction federal-prisoners habeas-corpus post-conviction-relief second-successive-claims statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2025-06-05
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether the bar in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1) applies to claims presented by federal prisoners in a second or successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Whether fraud and deceit per Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60(b)(3), and 60(b)(6) are subject to the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA).

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the bar in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1) applies to claims presented by federal prisoners in a second or successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

Docket Entries

2025-06-06
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2025-05-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/5/2025.
2025-05-03

Attorneys

Diehl, In Re David
David A. Diehl — Petitioner