Banister v. Davis

Banister v. Davis
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 1, 2020
Full case nameBanister v. Davis
Docket no.18-6943
Citations590 U.S. ___ (more)
Holding
A Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion to alter or amend a habeas court’s judgment is not a second or successive habeas petition under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Case opinions
MajorityKagan, joined by Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
DissentAlito, joined by Thomas
Laws applied
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act

Banister v. Davis, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion to alter or amend a habeas court’s judgment is not a second or successive habeas petition under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ Banister v. Davis, No. 18-6943, 590 U.S. ___ (2020).
  2. ^ "Opinion analysis: Justices reaffirm distinction between first and second habeas petitions". SCOTUSblog. June 3, 2020. Retrieved November 21, 2024.
  • Text of Banister v. Davis, No. 18-6943, 590 U.S. ___ (2020) is available from: Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain.

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.