In re: Michael Bowe
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Remanded
Michael Bowe sought authorization to file a second-or-successive § 2255 motion, arguing that his § 924(c) firearm conviction is invalid after United States v. Davis, United States v. Taylor, and Brown v. United States because neither attempted nor conspiracy Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of violence. Relying on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bowe v. United States, which rejected the Eleventh Circuit’s earlier reading of § 2244(b)(1), the Eleventh Circuit held that Bowe made a prima-facie showing under § 2255(h)(2) and therefore granted him permission to file his successive motion in the district court.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1)’s “old-claim bar” applies to second-or-successive § 2255 motions filed by federal prisoners.
Circuit Positions
§ 2244(b)(1) applies to federal prisoners’ successive § 2255 motions (same-claim bar blocks re-litigation).
§ 2244(b)(1) does NOT apply to federal prisoners; successive § 2255 applicants may re-assert old claims if they meet § 2255(h).
Conflict Summary
The Eleventh Circuit (and a minority of other circuits) treated § 2244(b)(1) as an automatic jurisdictional bar to any claim a federal prisoner had already presented in an earlier § 2255 motion. A majority of circuits concluded that § 2244(b)(1) applies only to § 2254 state-prisoner petitions and that federal prisoners may re-raise the same claim so long as they independently satisfy one of § 2255(h)’s two gateways.