Whether a mischaracterization of facts by a Judge warrant relief from a final judgment in light of Gonzalez v Crosby?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED . ; : Question One Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(B)(1) provides for relief from a Judgment or Order when a mistake of fact’ attributable to a Judge has resulted in a defect in the integrity _ of a Federal Habeas proceeding. The District Court, however, , “Assumed without deciding" that the Magistrate Judge : mischaracterized the factual basis for the relief sought through the petition. Hence, the mischaracterization by the court ; . prevented a merit determination of the Constitutional claim from the 28 U.S.C. 2255 petition. This raises the following question: Whether a mischaracterization of facts by a Judge warrant relief from a final judgment in light of Gonzalez vCrosby? . Question Two , On a Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(B)(3) motion, a party must establish (1) fraud, misrepresentation or misconduct on the part of the adverse party, and (2) that the moving party did not have the opportunity to present his case fully and fairly as a result of that misconduct. The District Court, however, failed to see a connection between the government's misrepresentation of the record and the Petitioner's claim that could warrant relief. But the misconduct is directly linked to the Petitioner's claim. This raises the following question: Whether a misrepresentation of the record warrant relief from ; a final Judgment? . . : . ‘ . Herve Wilmore, Jr. v. United States ; Case No. :