Magwood v. Patterson

Magwood v. Patterson
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 24, 2010
Full case name	Magwood v. Patterson
Citations	561 U.S. 287 ( more )
Holding
When a state prisoner obtains federal habeas corpus relief and is re-sentenced, a habeas application challenging the new judgment is not a "second or successive" challenge even if the prisoner could have challenged the original sentence on the same ground.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices John P. Stevens  · Antonin Scalia Anthony Kennedy  · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg  · Stephen Breyer Samuel Alito  · Sonia Sotomayor
Case opinions
Majority	Thomas, joined by Scalia; Stevens, Breyer, Sotomayor (except part IV-B)
Concurrence	Breyer (in part and in judgment), joined by Stevens, Sotomayor
Dissent	Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Ginsburg, Alito
Laws applied
28 U.S.C.   § 2244(b)

Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. 287 (2010), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, when a state prisoner obtains federal habeas corpus relief and is re-sentenced, a habeas application challenging the new judgment is not a "second or successive" challenge even if the prisoner could have challenged the original sentence on the same ground. ^[1]

Significance

In this context, the Court said the habeas petition challenged the judgment, not the state's overall custody of the petitioner. If the Court had interpreted this situation as a "second or successive challenge," the petitioner's case would have been ignored under 28 U.S.C.   § 2244(b) —even if it was meritorious. ^[2]

References

1. Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. 287 (2010)
2. "Challenge to new judgment not "second or successive"". SCOTUSblog. June 25, 2010. Retrieved October 29, 2024.

External links

• Text of Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. 287(2010) is available from: Cornell Findlaw Justia