Richard Clark v. D. J. Harmon, Warden
ERISA HabeasCorpus CriminalProcedure
Whether the fact that the § 2255 remedy failed to test and determine one of two Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel issues satisfies the phrase 'inadequate or ineffective' in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e), providing a district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 the subject matter jurisdiction to test and determine the issue and preventing suspension of the writ
QUESTIONS PRESENTED y 1. This Court's Article III inferiors are in turmoil over the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e)'s phrase "inadequate or ineffective." Congress has not defined the phrase. The Fifth Circuit held that showing the § 2255 ; Court failed to test and determine one of two Ineffective Assistance of ‘ Trial Counsel issues, even after shown Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures failed to correct the defect in the integrity of § 2255 , proceedings, did not satisfy its judicial meaning of the phrase. Other Circuits hold’ such a defect satisfies the phrase. Does the fact the § 2255 . we remedy failed to:test-and determine the one issue satisfy the phrase pro-~ i: viding. a district court‘under .28 U.S.C. § 2241 the subject. matter jurisdict~ oy . ion to, test and detérmine the ‘issue and preventing suspension of the writ?’ . : . 2. The Office of United States Magistrate Judge is not established unless, ' ; : in the discretion of the: Judicial Conference, the Conference determines a ; number of such offices, their: judicial location, and salary. Article II, § 2, Cl. 2 provides that Congress establish by Law all offices of the United States. Currently there is more than 500 such offices across the Nation. One of those judges is involved in the district court habeas proceedings. : The Fifth Circuit held there was no legal authority requiring Congress to ; fix the number of such judges and that what the Judicial Conference has done is Constitutional. Does Congress' delegating to the Judicial Confer: ence the legislative duty to determine the number of offices, their locations, and salary for such judges, violate Article I, § 1 and Article II, § 2, Cl. 2, rendering the actions takén.-by such magistrate judge in this case : void and i Py .