Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

In re: Lindsey, No. 09-3184

Article Placeholder Image
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

Find a Lawyer

More Options