Major v. United States of America
| MARCUS MAJOR |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 23-1225 |
| June 21, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 15, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER FILED. William C. CANBY, Consuelo M. CALLAHAN, John B. OWENS The applicants motion for leave to exceed page limitations is unnecessary. The application for authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion in the district court is denied. The applicant has not made a prima facie showing under 28 U.S.C. 2255(h) of: (1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable. See United States v. Eckford, F.4th , No. 17-50167, 2023 WL 5210863, at *7 (9th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023) (United States v. Taylor, 142 S. Ct. 2015 (2022), does not undermine this courts caselaw holding that completed Hobbs Act robbery and aiding and abetting Hobbs Act robbery are crimes of violence under 18 U.S.C. 924(c)); see also United States v. Major, No. 17-16764, 2022 WL 1714290, at *1 (9th Cir. May 27, 2022) (It is apparent from the record that Majors 924(c) convictions are predicated on Hobbs Act robbery, not conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery.). Any remaining pending motions are denied as moot. No further filings will be entertained in this case. DENIED. [Entered: 09/15/2023 11:28 AM]
|
| Filing 4 SOS DOCKETING NOTICE. Application for Permission to File a Second or Successive Habeas Corpus Petition has been opened and assigned the Ninth Circuit case number 23-1225. All subsequent correspondence regarding this matter will be added to your file to be considered at the same time the cause is brought before the court. The case number and the title of your case should be shown in the upper right corner of any correspondence to the clerk's office, and should be directed to the above address pursuant to Circuit Rule 25-1. [Entered: 06/22/2023 08:58 AM] |
| Filing 3 ADDED Petitioner Marcus Major. [Entered: 06/22/2023 08:45 AM] |
| Filing 2 CASE OPENED. Application for Leave to File Second or Successive 2255 Motion has been received in the Clerk's office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on 6/21/2023. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 23-1225 has been assigned to this case. [Entered: 06/21/2023 03:34 PM] |
| Filing 1 Application for Leave to File 28 U.S.C. 2255 Second or Successive Motion. [Entered: 06/21/2023 03:29 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Major v. United States of America | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: MARCUS MAJOR | |
| Represented By: | Marcus Major |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
