In a habeas corpus case, the district court's denial of defendant's 28 U.S.C. section 2255 motion is vacated and remanded where: 1) defendant's case is not moot because success would shorten his supervised release term; 2) jurisdiction exists because cognizability is not always a jurisdictional limit; 3) the district court should determine whether defendant is entitled to reinstate his 2008 motion under F.R.C.P. Rule 60; and 4) Begay v. US, 553 U.S. 137 (2008), applies retroactively and error is cognizable on collateral review where not defaulted.

Local News and Events

Nov 27, 2017
When one person manipulates or generates false ideas or promises in order to obtain another’s property, this is classified as theft by deception. Without question, theft by deception is an intentional…
Read More »
Oct 27, 2017
Given that Georgia’s drug crimes are high and its tolerance for drug possession is low, it’s safe to assume that anyone facing drug charges might end up in prison. However, there are multiple factors to…
Read More »
Sep 29, 2017
While many fathers hope to be involved in their children’s lives, some continue to assume that they have limited legal rights to do so. In reality, fathers have the right to become custodial parents, to…
Read More »
Aug 25, 2017
As a highly contested topic in criminal law, search and seizure, or “stop and search,” relates to encounters between citizens and law enforcement. At any point, if the stop or the search is carried out…
Read More »