Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

In re: Lindsey, No. 09-3184

By FindLaw Staff on September 16, 2009 5:04 PM

In a drug and firearm prosecution, the denial of plaintiff's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion claiming that the district court erred in deciding his 28 U.S.C. section 2255 motion for sentence modification without granting him an evidentiary hearing is affirmed where plaintiff's claims required authorization under section 2255(h) as a second or successive motion.

Read In re: Lindsey, No. 09-3184

Appellate Information

Filed September 16, 2009

Judges

Per Curiam

Copied to clipboard

Find a Lawyer

More Options