No. 18-7132

James R. Bright v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-12-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: 28-usc-2255 career-offender circuit-split filing-period habeas-corpus habeas-corpus-review johnson-decision johnson-v-united-states retroactive-application retroactivity section-2255 statute-of-limitations statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-02-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Section 2255(f)(3) tolls the filing period for a defendant asserting that Johnson v. United States applies in a situation similar to that in Johnson, or only for defendants asserting that Johnson applies to a situation exactly like that in Johnson

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Section 2255(f)(3) of Title 28 of the United States Code tolls the one-year filing period for a § 2255 motion until “the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court.” In Johnson, the Supreme Court initially recognized a new right. Does § 2255(f)(3) toll the filing period for a defendant asserting that Johnson applies in a situation similar to that in Johnson, or does it toll the period only for defendants asserting that Johnson applies to a situation exactly like that in Johnson? i

Docket Entries

2019-02-19
Petition DENIED. Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins, dissenting from the denial of certiorari: I dissent for the reasons set out in Brown v. United States, 586 U. S. ___ (2018) (Sotomayor, J., dissenting).
2019-01-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-22
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-12-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2019)

Attorneys

James R. Bright
Michael Clark HolleyOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Michael Clark HolleyOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent