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.
Posted on behalf of
913 Commercial Street
Conyers, GA 30012
Phone: (770) 929-1665
FAX: (770) 929-1197
Email: mqab@mqablaw.com
Mon - Fri: 9:00AM - 5:00PM