| 22-6407 |
Steven L. Haden v. California |
California |
2022-12-28 |
Denied |
IFP |
categorical-approach criminal-sentencing descamps-v-united-states elements-test mathis-v-united-states prior-conviction prior-conviction-enhancement retroactivity sixth-amendment teague-doctrine |
Are the Sixth Amendment holdings of Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) and Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. 500 (2016) fully retroactive,… |
| 20-7192 |
Phillip Vance Smith, II v. Josh Stein, et al. |
Fourth Circuit |
2021-02-22 |
Denied |
Response WaivedIFP |
civil-rights constitutional-review criminal-procedure death-penalty due-process fourth-circuit habeas-corpus ineffective-assistance-of-counsel retroactivity sixth-amendment teague-doctrine |
Whether the rule announced in McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 U.S. 1500 (2018) applies retroactively to cases on collateral review. |
| 19-8580 |
Lary James Plumlee v. Isidro Baca, Warden |
Nevada |
2020-06-02 |
Denied |
IFP |
constitutional-law criminal-procedure criminal-statute due-process retroactivity statutory-interpretation substantive-rule supreme-court-precedent teague-doctrine welch-v-united-states |
Under the new constitutional rule of retroactivity established in Montgomery v. Louisiana and clarified in Welch v. United States, is a state court re… |
| 19-6863 |
In Re Melvin Bonnell |
|
2019-12-05 |
Denied |
Relisted (2)IFP |
constitutional-law due-process federal-habeas federal-review habeas-corpus retroactive-application retroactivity sixth-circuit state-court-decisions teague-doctrine teague-standard |
Bonnell's habeas petition presents exceptional circumstances that, if left unresolved, will cause disparate interpretations of the federal Constitutio… |
| 18-8007 |
Kenneth R. Beagle v. Kevin Lindsey, Warden |
Sixth Circuit |
2019-02-15 |
Denied |
Response WaivedIFP |
alleyne-ruling Alleyne-v-United-States constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process Montgomery-v-Louisiana retroactivity retroactivity-doctrine supreme-court teague-doctrine Teague-v-Lane |
DID THE COURT IN MONTGOMERY V LOUISIANA IDENTIFY, FOR THE FIRST TIME, A THIRD CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHICH OF ITS RULINGS MAY BE APPLIED RETROACTIVE… |