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

Oct 15, 2020
Fraud is a serious charge with potentially serious consequences. When you are charged with fraud, you need a criminal defense attorney who is not afraid of meticulous detail work and research. Fraud charges…
Read More »
Sep 09, 2020
Business contracts are tricky. There is no blueprint that you can simply adapt to your needs. Whether you are dealing with lenders, suppliers or clients, it is important that any contractual agreements…
Read More »
Aug 18, 2020
Divorce is a difficult time, and ensuring children are taken care of should be at the top of each parent’s list. The stress that exists during divorce can sometimes make it difficult to keep thoughts coherent,…
Read More »
Jul 08, 2020
The loss of a loved one is always a tragic event, but when your loved one dies due to the reckless, criminal or negligent act of another person, the tragedy can sometimes be too much to bear. If you have…
Read More »