No. 18-6943
Gregory Dean Banister v. Lorie Davis, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Tags: aedpa appellate-procedure civil-procedure federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure federal-rules-of-civil-procedure habeas-corpus pro-se rule-59(e) successive-petition
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-06-20
(distributed 4 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Gonzalez v. Crosby extends to Rule 59(e) motions
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED : Question One: In Gonzalez v. Crosby this Court held that a Rule 60(b) motion that either adds’ new habeas claims, or attacks the court's previous resolution of the habeas claims, Should be treated as a successive habeas petition under AEDPA's §2244. Does Gonzalez extend to post-—judgment motions filed under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure? a. If so, should a timely filed Rtile 59(e) motion toll the the time to file a notice of appeal under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 4(a)(4)(A) (iv)? Question Two: whether a pro se petitioner must be warned and given an_opportunity to withdraw a post-—judgment motion which has been recharacterized as a successive habeas petition : if that recharacterization will effect his ability to file a timely notice of appeal? ; i. . 1 .
Docket Entries
2020-07-06
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2020-06-01
Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-6943_k5fm.pdf'>opinion</a> of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined.
2019-12-04
Argued. For petitioner: Brian T. Burgess, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Kyle D. Hawkins, Solicitor General, Austin, Tex.; and Benjamin Snyder, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)
2019-11-18
Reply of petitioner Gregory Dean Banister filed. (Distributed)
2019-11-12
Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
2019-10-25
Brief amici curiae of States of Indiana, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2019-10-25
Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.
2019-10-25
Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)
2019-10-25
CIRCULATED
2019-10-23
The Record from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.
2019-10-23
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.
2019-10-18
Brief of respondent Lorie Davis, Director TDCJ filed.
2019-09-13
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, December 4, 2019.
2019-09-03
Brief amici curiae of Law Professors with Expertise in Habeas Corpus and Civil Procedure filed.
2019-08-30
Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
2019-08-26
Brief of petitioner Gregory Dean Banister filed.
2019-08-26
Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
2019-07-17
Joint motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 26, 2019. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 18, 2019.
2019-07-10
Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.
2019-06-24
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED, and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED limited to the following question: Whether and under what circumstances a timely Rule 59(e) motion should be recharacterized as a second or successive habeas petition under Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U. S. 524 (2005).
2019-06-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
2019-05-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
2019-05-06
Rescheduled.
2019-04-24
Reply of petitioner Gregory Dean Banister filed. (Distributed)
2019-04-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
2019-04-10
Brief of respondent Lorie Davis, Director TDCJ in opposition filed.
2019-03-29
Letter from counsel for petitioner received.
2019-03-01
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted in part, and the time is extended to and including April 10, 2019.
2019-02-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 27, 2019 to April 26, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-01-28
Response Requested. (Due February 27, 2019)
2019-01-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2018-09-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 7, 2019)
Attorneys
Gregory Dean Banister
Brian Timothy Burgess — Goodwin Procter, LLP, Petitioner
Gregory Dean Banister — Petitioner
Gregory Dean Banister — Petitioner
Gregory Dean Bannister
Brian Timothy Burgess — Goodwin Procter, LLP, Petitioner
Brian Timothy Burgess — Goodwin Procter, LLP, Petitioner
Law Professors with Expertise in Habeas Corpus and Civil Procedure
Charlotte Hemenway Taylor — Jones Day, Amicus
Charlotte Hemenway Taylor — Jones Day, Amicus
Lorie Davis, Director TDCJ
Kyle Douglas Hawkins — Texas Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Kyle Douglas Hawkins — Texas Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Joseph Peter Corcoran — Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Respondent
Joseph Peter Corcoran — Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Respondent
Susan Frances San Miguel — Assistant Attorney General, Respondent
Susan Frances San Miguel — Assistant Attorney General, Respondent
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
States of Indiana, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent
Thomas M. Fisher — Amicus
Thomas M. Fisher — Amicus
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Amicus
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Amicus