Alfred Leotis Rodgers v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that whether a new rule of law may be raised in a successive § 2255 motion is conceptually distinct from whether the new rule would be retroactively applicable in a proper vehicle for collateral review
• “We have ... accepted review of Apprendi claims raised in initial § 2255 motions.”
• Apprendi does not apply retroactively to a second or successive 2255 motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).