No. 18-8496
Anthony Swatzie v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2255 constitutional-decision criminal-defendant criminal-procedure district-court-judgment due-process federal-statute federal-statutory-provision habeas-corpus retroactive-constitutional-decision retroactive-relief retroactivity section-2255 sentencing silent-record statutory-interpretation successive-motion
Latest Conference:
2019-04-26
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether, or under what circumstances, a criminal defendant pursuing a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is entitled to relief under a retroactive constitutional decision invalidating a federal statutory provision, where the record is silent as to whether the district court based its original judgment on that provision or another provision of the same statute.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a criminal defendant is entitled to relief under a retroactive constitutional decision invalidating a federal statutory provision
Docket Entries
2019-04-29
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.
2019-04-02
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-03-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 22, 2019)
Attorneys
Anthony Swatzie
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent