Jack E. Wright 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 completely new arguments in a § 2255 reply brief should be considered waived, even if the petitioner is pro se
• noting that issues not raised in the opening brief are waived
• allowing party to file an additional brief where opposing party articulated No. 07-3632 27 new theory
• “The reason for this rule of waiver is that a reply brief containing new theories deprives the respondent of an opportunity to-brief those new issues.”
• “If the sufficiency argument was not made in Wright's initial brief to this court, it should have been considered waived
• “The reason for this rule of waiver is that a reply brief containing new theories deprives the respondent of an opportunity to brief those new issues.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).