No. 18-8112
Floyd Andrew Brown, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: appellate-review certificate-of-appealability civil-rights constitutional-issues constitutional-review due-process habeas-corpus judicial-procedure merit-standard reasonable-jurists section-2255 standard-of-review standing
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment DueProcess HabeasCorpus
FifthAmendment DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-05-16
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should the judgment be vacated and remanded in light of Buck v. Davis?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Questions Presented For Review ) 7 , i. QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW QUESTION (S) Should the judgment be vacated, and mabe remanded, in light of [ Buck v. Davis, 580 US. _; 137 S.Ct. 759, 197 L.Ed2d 107 (2017)-]. Where the Court Of Appeals, in a § 2255, required that a high[er], requirement of merit proof, must . first occur, before it would permit a COA to be be granted, but ignored the constitutional issues, and the arguments of reasonable jurists. ? : Petition For Writ Of Certiorari Page ii. II. (
Docket Entries
2019-05-20
Rehearing DENIED.
2019-04-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2019.
2019-04-16
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2019-03-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2019.
2019-03-05
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-01-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 25, 2019)
2018-01-08
Application (17A724) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until January 14, 2018.
2017-11-14
Application (17A724) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 15, 2017 to January 14, 2018, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
Floyd Andrew Brown, Jr.
Floyd A. Brown — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent