In re: Cary Michael Lambrix

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that published decisions' in the context of an application for permission to file a second or successive § 2255 petition are binding precedent
• recognizing that where trial evidence differs substantially from evidence considered on appeal, the law-of-the-case doctrine does not prohibit consideration of the evidence in post-appeal proceedings in the trial court
• holding that a prior panel’s order regarding an application to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition precluded the applicant’s instant application to file a second or successive habeas corpus petition
• holding that “our prior-panel-precedent rule applies with equal force as to prior panel decisions published in the context of applications to file second or successive petitions. In other words, published three-judge orders issued under [28 U.S.C.] § 2244(b
• noting that “a prior panel precedent cannot be circumvented or ignored on the basis of arguments not made to or considered by the prior panel.”
• stating that this Court has “categorically rejected an overlooked reason or argument exception to the prior-panel-precedent rule”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).