Brown v. Piccolo

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that prisoners sentenced prior to Alleyne may not challenge their sentences under § 2241 because Alleyne did not render the crimes for which they were convicted noncriminal
• holding that § 2255 “is not inadequate or ineffective to raise an Alleyne argument”
• holding that Alleyne merely regulates “sentencing procedure” and does not render previously criminal conduct noncriminal, and therefore an Alleyne-based claim does not satisfy the stringent requirements of Section 2255(e) or Dorsainvil
• holding that an Alleyne1 claim cannot be raised in a 1 Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013). “In Alleyne, 133 S.Ct. 2151, the Supreme Court mirrored its opinion in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000
• holding that an Alleyne1 claim cannot be raised in a 1 Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013). “In Alleyne, 133 S.Ct. 2151, the Supreme Court mirrored its opinion in Apprendi v. New Jersey, (footnote continued on next page) §2241 petition
• finding that special monetary assessments do not rise to the level of “custody”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).