No. 24-7174
IFP
Tags: 2255-application appellate-review habeas-corpus judicial-fraud miscarriage-of-justice sixth-circuit
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2025-05-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Sixth Circuit committed judicial fraud upon the court when denying Patel's Second or Successive 2255 Application, and does this constitute a grave miscarriage of justice
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTON NUMBER ONE: Whether the Sixth Circuit committed judicial fraud upon the court when the Appellate Court denied Patel's Second or Successive 2255 Application on June 18, 2024, thus, refusing to correct judicial fraud upon the court in their recent January 17, 2025, Order does this constitute a grave miscarriage of justice ? ii.
Docket Entries
2025-06-02
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus 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).
2025-05-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/29/2025.
2025-04-15
Petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.
Attorneys
Babubhai Patel
Babubhai Patel — Petitioner