ANTHONY MCGEE V. USA, No. 18-72243 (9th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED JAN 10 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANTHONY MCGEE, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-72243 Applicant, v. ORDER* UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. Application to File Second or Successive Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Argued and Submitted November 13, 2019 San Francisco, California Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and TASHIMA and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges. The application for authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion in the district court is denied. The applicant seeks to rely on McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500 (2018), but has not demonstrated that even if McCoy were held to be retroactive to cases on collateral review, it would govern the facts of his case. The applicant has therefore not made a prima facie showing under 28 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. U.S.C. § 2255(h) of “a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.” Any pending motions are denied as moot. No further filings will be entertained in this case. DENIED. 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.