-
986 F.3d 1345·
11th Cir.·
2021-02-05
·cited 16×
A sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) does not constitute a new, intervening judgment for purposes of the bar on second or successive § 2255 motions under AEDPA.
-
941 F.3d 1285·
11th Cir.·
2019-11-01
·cited 10×
The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court correctly dismissed Holland's third federal habeas petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it was a successive petition that failed to obtain prior authorization from the court of appeals.
-
935 F.3d 1176·
11th Cir.·
2019-08-21
·cited 9×
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the petitioner's second federal habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction because he failed to obtain authorization from the court of appeals before filing it, as required by AEDPA.
-
940 F.3d 1210·
11th Cir.·
2019-10-15
·cited 4×
The Eleventh Circuit held that the District Court lacked jurisdiction over a new § 2255 challenge because the defendant did not obtain permission to file it. The court also held that the defendant failed to show his resentenced term was substantively unreasonable.
-
935 F.3d 1210·
11th Cir.·
2019-08-22
·cited 4×
Gary Ray Bowles, a death row inmate convicted of murder in 1994, sought authorization from the Eleventh Circuit to file a successive federal habeas petition claiming intellectual disability and thus ineligibility for execution under Atkins v. Virginia. The court denied his applic
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-03-28
·cited 3×
The district court dismissed the petition for writ of habeas corpus because it was second or successive and the petitioner failed to obtain authorization from the Eleventh Circuit to file it.
-
2020 WL 4756761·
N.D. Fla.·
2024-10-28
·cited 2×
A prisoner's civil rights complaint challenging the validity of his conviction is barred by Heck v. Humphrey and Preiser v. Rodriguez, and must be dismissed.
-
2021 WL 247917·
S.D. Fla.·
2023-09-27
·cited 2×
A resentencing order that is nunc pro tunc to the original judgment does not create a 'new judgment' for purposes of filing a second or successive federal habeas corpus petition.
-
2022 WL 1234728·
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-05
·cited 2×
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances to justify relief from the judgment dismissing his habeas petition as untimely.
-
2009 WL 1227820·
S.D. Fla.·
2023-10-22
·cited 1×
The court held that a pro se petitioner's motion, even if labeled as a motion for consideration of actual innocence, is legally a successive petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction if the petitioner has not obtained
-
2022 WL 3356390·
M.D. Fla.·
2023-08-21
·cited 1×
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider a second or successive motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit.
-
2020 WL 3640479·
M.D. Fla.·
2023-05-17
·cited 1×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition filed without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit is an unauthorized second or successive petition over which the district court lacks jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-12-19
A district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas corpus petition if the petitioner has not obtained authorization from the appropriate court of appeals.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-10-24
A district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas corpus petition that has not been authorized by the appropriate court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-09
Earon Tyler, convicted of murder and attempted robbery in 1995, sought federal habeas relief on thirteen claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, most of which were not exhausted in state court. The court found that Tyler failed to establish the requisite Strickland pre
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-09-08
The court held that a federal habeas petition filed without prior authorization from the court of appeals is an unauthorized successive petition over which the district court lacks jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-11
The district court dismissed the habeas corpus application because it was an unauthorized second or successive filing.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2025-08-05
The court held that a successive federal habeas petition filed without prior authorization from the court of appeals must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-28
The court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider the petitioner's Rule 60(b) motion because it constitutes a second or successive habeas petition for which authorization was not obtained.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2024-10-21
The court held that a successive federal habeas petition must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction if the petitioner has not obtained authorization from the appropriate court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-27
The court held that a federal court should not interfere with pending state criminal proceedings absent exceptional circumstances, and that claims must be exhausted in state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-24
A district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 unless the movant first obtains permission from the appropriate court of appeals.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2024-09-11
The court held that a district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas corpus petition that has not been authorized by the appropriate court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-05
The court held that a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is not the proper vehicle to challenge the validity of a federal conviction or sentence based on an allegedly illegal indictment. Such claims must be brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and petitioner had
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-08-29
The court held that a resentencing order entered nunc pro tunc does not constitute a new judgment for purposes of AEDPA's second or successive petition bar, and thus the current petition is barred.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-08-14
The court held that a federal district court lacks jurisdiction over a habeas corpus petition when the petitioner is not 'in custody' under the challenged conviction, and the sentences for those convictions have expired.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-08-01
The district court dismissed the habeas corpus application because it was a second or successive filing without the required authorization from the court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-05-01
The court held that a motion for reconsideration of a denied habeas petition, which reasserts claims of innocence or attacks the merits of the prior decision, is a successive habeas petition requiring appellate authorization and thus dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. However, a
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-03-18
The court held that a Rule 60(b) motion seeking to relitigate a previously denied habeas claim based on newly discovered evidence is a successive habeas petition, and since it was filed without authorization from the court of appeals, the district court lacks jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-01-30
A district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas corpus application without prior authorization from the court of appeals.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2023-10-04
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas petition filed without prior Eleventh Circuit authorization and that challenges to clemency processes are not cognizable under § 2254.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-08-01
The court held that the applicant's current habeas corpus application is an unauthorized second or successive application because the amended judgment correcting a clerical error did not constitute a new judgment authorizing confinement. Therefore, the district court lacks jurisd
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-17
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive federal habeas corpus petition unless the petitioner obtains prior authorization from the appropriate court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-14
A district court lacks jurisdiction to hear a second or successive § 2254 petition unless the appropriate appellate court has authorized its consideration.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-07
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider a second or successive motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 when the petitioner had not obtained authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-04-25
The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas corpus petition filed without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-05-27
The court held that the current petition for a writ of habeas corpus is an unauthorized second or successive petition, and therefore the court lacks jurisdiction to consider it.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-27
A federal court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas petition without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-21
The court held that a habeas petition challenging expired convictions must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and a petition challenging enhanced sentences based on those expired convictions is successive if a prior petition was already filed.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-10
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a clear right to relief or a clear duty owed by the respondents, and thus, mandamus relief was not appropriate.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-07-27
The court held that a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation is not required before a district court dismisses a case sua sponte, even if a case is referred to a Magistrate Judge.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-12
A federal district court cannot consider a second or successive habeas corpus petition without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-21
The court held that a federal habeas petition challenging a state court conviction previously attacked in a prior federal habeas petition is a "second or successive" petition, requiring preauthorization from the Eleventh Circuit, and absent such authorization, the district court
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-11
A federal district court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas petition if the petitioner has not obtained authorization from the court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-11-13
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas petition without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-08-10
The court held that a Rule 60(b) motion seeking to raise a new claim for habeas relief is a successive petition requiring prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-09
A district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 absent prior authorization from the Court of Appeals.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-04-07
The district court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second or successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 if the movant has not obtained permission from the court of appeals.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-10-23
The court granted a limited stay of execution to allow newly appointed federal counsel sufficient time to review and present potential habeas corpus claims.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2019-10-04
The court held that a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed without prior authorization from the Eleventh Circuit is an unauthorized successive petition and must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.