DANIEL M. THOMAS, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

v.

LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Gissendaner v. Comm'r, Ga. Dep't OF Corr., Warden, Ga. Diagnostic & Classification Prison, Other Unknown Emps. & Agents, Ga. Dep't of Corr., 779 F.3d 1275 (11th Cir. 2015)
  …Rutherford v. McDonough, 466 F. 3d 970, 977 (11th Cir.2006) (“[A] grant of certiorari does not change the law.”); Ritter v. Thigpen, 828 F. 2d 662, 665-66 (11th Cir.1987) (“A grant of certiorari does not constitute new law.”); Thomas v. Wainwright, 788 F. 2d 684, 689 (11th Cir.1986) (“The grant of the writ of certiorari ... is no authority to the contrary; any implications to be drawn therefrom may be discerned by application to the Supreme Court.”). Until the Supreme Court issues a decision that actually…
• Johnston v. Singletary, 162 F.3d 630 (11th Cir. 1998)
  …e stated that “once the issue of competency to stand trial is raised and the state court takes the proper steps to resolve the issue, the defendant is [not] free to drop the issue or later pick it up as it suits his purposes.” Thomas v. Wainwright, 788 F. 2d 684, 688 (11th Cir.1986). The state asks that we avail ourselves of the Thomas procedural exception to the “no procedural default” rule articulated in Adams and find Johnston’s substantive competency claim to be procedurally barred. There is no eviden…
• Rutherford v. McDONOUGH, 466 F.3d 970 (11th Cir. 2006)
  …this claim changed in January 2006. While the Supreme Court did grant certiorari in the Hill case on January 25, 2006, a grant of certiorari does not change the law. See Ritter v. Thigpen, 828 F. 2d 662, 665-66 (11th Cir.1987); Thomas v. Wainwright, 788 F. 2d 684, 689 (11th Cir.1986). When Rutherford finally filed his claim on Friday night, January 27, 2006, to stop his scheduled execution on Tuesday, January 31, the law in this circuit was the same as it had been during the entire time he was withholding…