In re: Lambrix, No. 14-15617 (11th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, convicted of two murders and sentenced to death, filed an application seeking an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner argues that certain newly discovered evidence that he could not have previously discovered through the exercise of due diligence is sufficient to establish clear and convincing evidence that, but for Brady and Giglio constitutional violations, no reasonable factfinder would have found him guilty of the murders. The court concluded that all of petitioner's proposed claims in the instant application are precluded by the law-of-the-case doctrine, the prior-panel-precedent rule, or both, or otherwise failed to meet the requirements of 28 U.S.C. 2244(b). Accordingly, the court denied the application.
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.