Editor's Note :

close editor's note Editor's Note :

1) There is a possibility of opinions on Thursday at 10 a.m. We will begin live-blogging at 9 a.m. at this link, where readers can also sign up for an email reminder when we start the live blog.
2) We are hosting an online symposium on the Supreme Court’s opinions in partisan-gerrymandering cases Gill v. Whitford and Benisek v. Lamone. Contributions to the symposium and additional coverage are available on our case page for Gill.
3) Our statistics page presents the data on each sitting – the cases (14 remain undecided) and the majority-opinion authors.

Magwood v. Patterson

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
09-158 11th Cir. Mar 24, 2010
Tr.
Jun 24, 2010 5-4 Thomas OT 2009

Disclosure: Akin Gump and Howe & Russell represent the petitioner in this case.

Holding: A state prisoner can often petition a federal court for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging her state court conviction or sentence. But she generally may not file a second or successive application for habeas relief. In Magwood, the defendant prevailed on habeas and had his case sent back to the state courts for a new sentencing proceeding, After the state court imposed the same sentence again, he again sought federal habeas relief. This time, he raised a new argument that could have been in his initial application but was not. The Supreme Court held that when a state prisoner obtains federal habeas relief and is re-sentenced, a habeas application challenging the new judgment is not “second or successive, even if the prisoner could have challenged the original sentence on the same ground.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas on June 24, 2010. Justice Kennedy dissented, joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Ginsburg and Alito.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs

[edit] Amicus Briefs

Certiorari-stage documents

 
Share:
Term Snapshot
Awards