King v. Morgan, No. 13-4189 (6th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, convicted of murder and felonious assault, filed a federal habeas petition and the district court denied relief. Then petitioner asked the state trial court to vacate his sentence because it failed to include mandatory post-release control. The state court complied and resentenced petitioner. After further challenges in state court failed, petitioner filed another federal habeas petition. The court subsequently granted a certificate of appealability on the five claims attacking the original convictions to determine if the claims should be considered second or successive claims. Magwood v. Patterson held that a petition challenging a new sentence imposed after a full resentencing and leading to a new judgment does not count as second or successive - even if the claimant previously filed petitions that challenged the original sentence and even if he raised or could have raised the same claims in those earlier petitions. In this case, the court held that a habeas petitioner, after a full resentencing and the new judgment that goes with it, may challenge his undisturbed conviction without triggering the “second or successive” requirements. Accordingly, the court reversed the determination that petitioner's conviction-related claims are second or successive and remanded the petition for further proceedings.
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.