No. 20-8386
Cheddie Lamar Griffin v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-law criminal-procedure davis-precedent due-process federal-procedure habeas-corpus johnson-rule sentencing statutory-interpretation successive-petition supreme-court
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the circuit panel's decision affirming the denial of the authorized successive 2255 petition was erroneous
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
No question identified. : STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE(S) I. WHETHER THE CIRCUIT PANEL’S DECISION AFFIRMING THE DISTRICT COURT’S DENIAL OF MR. GRIFFIN’S AUTHORIZED SUCCESSIVE 2255 (UNDER JOHNSON) SIMPLY BECAUSE THE SAID CHALLENGE DID NOT EXPRESSLY MENTION DAVIS’ NEW RULE OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IS ERRONEOUS SINCE DAVIS’ SUPREME COURT LAW IS CONTROLLING, AUTHORITATIVE, AND DIRECTLY APPLICABLE. :
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-25
Waiver of right of respondent United States Of America to respond filed.
2021-06-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 22, 2021)
Attorneys
Cheddie Griffin
Noel Lawrence — LAW OFFICES OF NOEL G. LAWRENCE, P. A., Petitioner
Noel Lawrence — LAW OFFICES OF NOEL G. LAWRENCE, P. A., Petitioner
United States Of America
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent