Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Magwood v. Patterson

Docket No.: 09-158
Certiorari Granted: 11/16/2009
Argued: March 24, 2010
Decided: June 24, 2010

Topics:

Death Penalty, Fourteenth Amendment, habeas, habeas corpus, harmless error, ineffective assistance of counsel, murder, res judicata

PartyNames: Billy Joe Magwood v. Tony Patterson, Warden, et al.
Petitioner: Billy Joe Magwood
Respondent: Tony Patterson, Warden, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Citation: 555 F.3d 968
Supreme Court Docket

Billy Joe Magwood
v.
Tony Patterson, Warden, et al.
Question Presented:

:flOmega 1. When a person is resentenced after having obtained federal habeas relief from an earlier sentence, is a claim in a federal habeas petition challenging that new sentencing judgment a "second or successive" claim under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2244(b) if the petitioner could have challenged his previously imposed (but now vacated) sentence on the same constitutional grounds? flOmega 2. Did petitioner's attorney provide ineffective assistance of counsel warranting federal habeas relief by failing to raise an argument at petitioner's resentencing proceedings that would have made clear that petitioner was constitutionally ineligible for the death penalty?

Question:

When a person is resentenced after having obtained federal habeas corpus relief from an earlier sentence, is a claim in a federal habeas petition challenging the new sentencing judgment a "successive claim," and therefore prohibited, if the petitioner could have challenged his previously imposed sentence on the same constitutional grounds?

Magwood v. Patterson
ORAL ARGUMENT

March 24, 2010

Holding: reversed and remanded
Vote: 5-4
Opinion By: Justice Clarence Thomas
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)