Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Smith v. Hall, 62 F.3d 1411, 1st Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Anthony Smith's habeas corpus petition. The district court had concluded that considering the merits of Smith's petition was barred under Teague v. Lane and its progeny, as Smith sought a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure that was not a watershed rule. The Court of Appeals found no error in the district court's decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Smith v. Hall, 62 F.3d 1411, 1st Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Anthony Smith's habeas corpus petition. The district court had concluded that considering the merits of Smith's petition was barred under Teague v. Lane and its progeny, as Smith sought a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure that was not a watershed rule. The Court of Appeals found no error in the district court's decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1995-08-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 62 F.3d 1411 Docket: 95-1057

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Anthony Smith's habeas corpus petition. The district court had concluded that considering the merits of Smith's petition was barred under Teague v. Lane and its progeny, as Smith sought a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure that was not a watershed rule. The Court of Appeals found no error in the district court's decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views2 pages

    Smith v. Hall, 62 F.3d 1411, 1st Cir. (1995)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case summary from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of Anthony Smith's habeas corpus petition. The district court had concluded that considering the merits of Smith's petition was barred under Teague v. Lane and its progeny, as Smith sought a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure that was not a watershed rule. The Court of Appeals found no error in the district court's decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    62 F.

    3d 1411

    NOTICE: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 states unpublished


    opinions may be cited only in related cases.
    Anthony SMITH, Petitioner, Appellant,
    v.
    Timothy HALL, Respondent, Appellee.
    No. 95-1057.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    First Circuit.
    Aug. 1, 1995.

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE


    DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock, U.S.
    District Judge.]
    Willie J. Davis, Davis, Robinson & White, on brief for appellant.
    Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General, and William J. Meade, Assistant
    Attorney General, on brief for appellee.
    Before SELYA, CYR and BOUDIN, Circuit Judges..
    D.MASS.
    AFFIRMED
    PER CURIAM.

    Anthony Smith appeals from the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus
    petition. See Smith v. Hall, 874 F. Supp. 441 (D.Mass.1995). The district court
    concluded that Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) (plurality opinion), and its
    progeny barred consideration of the merits of Smith's petition because Smith
    sought a new, constitutional rule of criminal procedure which was not a
    "watershed" rule of criminal procedure. Finding no error in the court's decision,
    we affirm substantially for the reasons stated at length by the district court. See
    Loc. R. 27.1.

    Affirmed.

    You might also like