Nathaniel Griggs v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections, et al, No. 14-10737 (11th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 14-10737 Date Filed: 01/28/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 14-10737 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 4:13-cv-00157-CDL NATHANIEL GRIGGS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus WARDEN, et al., Respondents, COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WARDEN, Respondents-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia ________________________ (January 28, 2015) Case: 14-10737 Date Filed: 01/28/2015 Page: 2 of 2 Before TJOFLAT, WILSON, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Nathaniel Griggs appeals the dismissal of his pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition raising four claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Given our instructions set out in Clisby v. Jones, 960 F.2d 925 (11th Cir. 1992), the district court committed a Clisby error by not addressing two ineffective assistance claims raised in an amendment to Griggs’s petition. Accordingly, we vacate the dismissal of Griggs’s petition, without prejudice, and remand for further proceedings. VACATED AND REMANDED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
