United States v. Michael Lloyd Craycraft

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that failing to file an appeal was of a different time and type of ineffective assistance of counsel than failing to object to drug types used at sentencing or failing to pursue a downward departure
• holding that, because the petitioner’s proposed amendment did not relate back to his original petition, the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the claim, and affirming the district court’s dismissal of the claim on different grounds
• holding that failing to file an appeal was of a different time and type of ineffective assistance of counsel than failing to object to drug types used at sentencing or failing to pursue a downward departure
• noting that the civil rules apply to § 2255 actions and that motions to amend are reviewed under Fed. R. Civ. P, 15 for an abuse of discretion
• “If claims become available after the habeas corpus petition is filed, the petitioner generally should amend the new claims into the petition at the earliest possible opportunity....”
• failure to file an appeal is not the same type of error as failure to seek a downward departure or challenge the drug type at sentencing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).