Magwood v. Patterson

Docket No.
Op. Below
Argument
Mar 24, 2010
Tr.
Opinion
Vote
5-4
Author
Thomas
Term

Disclosure: Akin Gump and Howe & Russell represent the petitioner in this case.

Holding: A state prisoner can often petition a federal court for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging her state court conviction or sentence. But she generally may not file a second or successive application for habeas relief. In Magwood, the defendant prevailed on habeas and had his case sent back to the state courts for a new sentencing proceeding, After the state court imposed the same sentence again, he again sought federal habeas relief. This time, he raised a new argument that could have been in his initial application but was not. The Supreme Court held that when a state prisoner obtains federal habeas relief and is re-sentenced, a habeas application challenging the new judgment is not “second or successive, even if the prisoner could have challenged the original sentence on the same ground.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas on June 24, 2010. Justice Kennedy dissented, joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Ginsburg and Alito.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Briefs and Documents

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY

Merits Briefs

[edit] Amicus Briefs

[##CERT-STAGE##]

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY