No. 20-6266
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appeal appellate-power case-error civil-rights due-process extraordinary-circumstances habeas-corpus judicial-review rule-60b standing
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the unique facts of Petitioner's case reveal extraordinary circumstances justifying relief from the Habeas Judgment under Rule 60(b)(6)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; 1. Question in reviewing the merits of Rule 60(b)(6). Motion is whether the unique fact of Petitioner's case reveal extraordinary circumstances justifying relief from the Habeas Judgment. The answer to this question is "Yes" 2. Why if Appeal Courts have: an inherent power to correct earlier error, if it becomes apparent and avoid injustice. 3. In this instant case, does Buck, Tharpe and Apprendi, Haymond reguire this Court to Remand with instruction to allow the Rule 60¢b) as timely filed. i
Docket Entries
2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-11-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-10-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 10, 2020)
Attorneys
Mario Salas
Mario Salas — Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent