Griffin v. Secretary, FL DOC, No. 14-14851 (11th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePetitioner sought reconsideration of a single-judge order denying him a certificate of appealability (COA), arguing that jurists of reason could debate whether Rule 60(b)(5) and 60(b)(6) permit him to challenge the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. 2254 petition by seeking a retroactive application of the Supreme Court's decisions in Trevino v. Thaler. The court concluded that Arthur v. Thomas foreclosed the Rule 60(b)(6) part of the application. While the court has yet to address Rule 60(b)(5) in the context of section 2254 proceedings, binding decisions of this Court have defined the term “prospectively” in a way that forecloses any reasonable possibility that the rule could apply here. The court joined its sister circuits in holding that Rule 60(b)(5) does not allow a section 2254 petitioner to challenge a final judgment based on subsequent Supreme Court decisions. The court rejected petitioner's remaining arguments and denied the petition.
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.