"Jones v. Hendrix: Brief for Habeas Scholars as Amici Curiae in Support" by Eve Brensike Primus
 

Document Type

Brief

Publication Date

7-21-2022

Abstract

Amici curiae are legal scholars at universities across the country with expertise in habeas corpus and criminal law. They have collectively spent decades researching, studying, teaching, and writing about the writ of habeas corpus. Amici share an interest in seeing habeas law applied in a way that ensures the just and timely adjudication of claims.

An individual is mistakenly convicted of a crime in federal court and wrongly condemned to serve a lengthy prison sentence for acts that are not actually criminal under the law. He files a timely motion challenging his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, but because of an error in existing precedent, the district court that sentenced him denies his motion. The court of appeals, applying its governing (but incorrect) precedent, affirms. The court of appeals then denies rehearing and this Court denies his petition for a writ of certiorari. In a subsequent case brought by another defendant, however, this Court clarifies the law and rules in the defendant’s favor on the exact same basis that our claimant raised in his Section 2255 motion.

What is our hypothetical claimant to do? Congress has provided the answer: Because Section 2255(e) contains a “saving clause,” he may file a habeas corpus petition under Section 2241.

Comments

Amicus: Beety, Valena; Blume, John; Chemerinsky, Erwin; Freedman, Eric M.; Garrett, Brandon; Gohara, Miriam; Hafetz, Jonathan; Hasbrouck, Brandon; Hertz, Randy; Huq, Aziz; Johnson, Sheri Lynn; Kovarsky, Lee; Marceau, Justin; Primus, Eve Brensike; Robbins, Ira P.; Steiker, Jordan; Vladeck, Stephen I.; Yackle, Larry

Share

COinS