No. 20-5624
Juan Francisco Vega v. Chad Poppell, Secretary, Florida Department of Children and Families
IFP
Tags: §2254-petition certificate-of-appealability circuit-court-discretion extraordinary-circumstances false-imprisonment habeas-corpus sexually-violent-predator successive-petitions
Key Terms:
DueProcess FourthAmendment HabeasCorpus
DueProcess FourthAmendment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2020-11-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)
whether-jurists-could-debate-abuse-of-discretion
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED WHETHER JURISTS OF REASON COULD DEBATE THAT THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY NOT GRANTING A COA WHERE THE UNDERLYING CLAIM OF THE SECOND g2254 PETITION IS NOT DUPLICATIVE OF THE FIRST AND IT'S PREDICTED ON LACK OF WHICH RESULTED IN FALSE IMPRISONMENT, WHICH IS AN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE WARRANTING RELIEF, EXPLICITLY SINCE SUCCESSIVE §2254 PETITIONS ARE AUTHORIZED IN SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR CASES THAT ARE EXEMPT FROM THE BAR OF 28 U.S.C. §2244 (B). -2
Docket Entries
2020-11-09
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2020-10-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/6/2020.
2020-08-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 9, 2020)