Ronald W. Holcomb v. David Ballard, Warden

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Davis “announced a new rule of constitutional law retroactively applicable on a first habeas petition”
• holding that the rule announced in Davis applies retroactively
• finding that Davis announced new rule of constitutional law retroactively applicable to § 2255 motion
• finding that Davis announced new rule of constitutional law retroactively applicable on a first § 2255 petition
• finding that Davis announced a new rule of constitutional law retroactively applicable on a first § 2255 motion
• observing that “the rule announced in Davis meets the standard for a new substantive rule,” because the United States Supreme Court held “that § 924(c)(3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).