Magwood v. Patterson

Decision Date24 March 2010
Docket NumberNo. 09-158.,09-158.
Citation130 S.Ct. 2788,177 L. Ed. 2d 592
PartiesBilly Joe MAGWOOD, Petitioner, v. Tony PATTERSON, Warden, et al.
CourtU.S. Supreme Court




Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, CA, appointed by this Court, for petitioner.

Corey L. Maze, Solicitor General, Montgomery, AL, for respondents.

Troy King, Attorney General, Corey L. Maze, Solicitor General, Counsel of Record, Beth Jackson Hughes, J. Clayton Crenshaw, Assistant Attorneys General, Office of the Alabama Attorney General, Montgomery, AL, for respondents.

James A. Power Jr., Marguerite Del Valle, Power Del Valle LLP, New York, NY, Thomas C. Goldstein, Akin, Gump, Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, Washington, DC, Jeffrey L. Fisher, Counsel of Record, Pamela S. Karlan, Stanford Law School, Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, Stanford, CA, Amy Howe, Kevin K. Russell, Howe & Russell, P.C., Bethesda, MD, for petitioner.

Justice THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV-B.

Petitioner Billy Joe Magwood was sentenced to death for murdering a sheriff. After the Alabama courts denied relief on direct appeal and in postconviction proceedings, Magwood filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus in Federal District Court, challenging both his conviction and his sentence. The District Court conditionally granted the writ as to the sentence, mandating that Magwood either be released or resentenced. The state trial court conducted a new sentencing hearing and again sentenced Magwood to death. Magwood filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court challenging this new sentence. The District Court once again conditionally granted the writ, finding constitutional defects in the new sentence. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed, holding in relevant part that Magwood's challenge to his new death sentence was an unreviewable "second or successive" challenge under 28 U.S.C.

To continue reading

Request your trial
222 cases
  • Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson, 09-497.
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 26, 2010
  • Suggs v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • January 17, 2013
    ...not the resentencing. The Supreme Court recently addressed a closely related but distinct question in Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. ––––, 130 S.Ct. 2788, 177 L.Ed.2d 592 (2010), holding that a petitioner's second challenge to his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was not barred as “second ......
  • Jordan v. Epps
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi
    • August 30, 2010
    ...Court, a subsequent habeas petition that attacks a different judgment is not "second or successive." Magwood v. Patterson, --- U.S. ----, 130 S.Ct. 2788, 177 L.Ed.2d 592 (2010); Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147, 127 S.Ct. 793, 166 L.Ed.2d 628 (2007). In the earlier case, Burton, the Supreme ......
  • Rent-A-Center, W., Inc. v. Jackson
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 21, 2010
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The Appellate Corner
    • United States
    • Alabama State Bar Alabama Lawyer No. 73-2, March 2012
    • Invalid date
    ...Campbell v. Sec'y, Dept. of Corr., No. 10-12404, 2011 WL 4840725 (11th Cir. Oct. 13, 2011) Because, following Magwood v. Patterson, 130 S. Ct. 2788 (2010), a habeas petition seeking relief from a resentencing is not deemed successive under the AEDPA, the district court was required to recon......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT