Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Danny Richard Rivers v. Eric Guerrero, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 21-11031 · judgment April 15, 2024
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Fifth Circuit decision below, a petition filed soon after the judgment below, and a circuit split argued in the petition, and down for a state or local-government respondent.
Question presented
Under the federal habeas statute, a prisoner "always gets one chance to bring a federal habeas challenge to his conviction," Banister v. Davis, 590 U.S. 504, 509 (2020). After that, the stringent gatekeeping requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2) bar nearly all attempts to file a "second or successive habeas corpus application." Here, petitioner sought to amend his initial habeas application while it was pending on appeal. The Fifth Circuit applied § 2244(b)(2) and rejected the amended filing. The circuits are intractably split on whether § 2244(b)(2) applies to such filings. The Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits hold that § 2244(b)(2) categorically applies to all second-in-time habeas filings made after the district court enters final judgment. The Second Circuit disagrees, applying § 2244(b)(2) only after a petitioner exhausts appellate review of his initial petition. And the Third and Tenth Circuits exempt some second-in-time filings from § 2244(b)(2), depending on whether a prisoner prevails on his initial appeal (Third Circuit) or satisfies a seven-factor test (Tenth Circuit). The question presented is: Whether § 2244(b)(2) applies (i) only to habeas filings made after a prisoner has exhausted appellate review of his first petition, (ii) to all second-in-time habeas filings after final judgment, or (iii) to some second-in-time filings, depending on a prisoner's success on appeal or ability to satisfy a seven-factor test.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Peter Andrew Bruland
Sidley Austin LLP
For respondent
Aaron Lloyd Nielson
Office of the Texas Attorney General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 4 conferences
Amicus briefs
3 cert-stage · 10 merits
(5 supporting pet./neither, 5 respondent)
Argument & decision
Argued March 31, 2025 — Peter A. Bruland · Aaron L. Nielson. Audio and transcript
Decided June 12, 2025. Opinion by Jackson.
Proceedings
- Jul 14 2025Judgment Issued.
- Jun 12 2025Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Jackson, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
- Mar 31 2025Argued. For petitioner: Peter A. Bruland, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Aaron L. Nielson, Solicitor General, Austin, Tex.; and Matthew Guarnieri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)
- Mar 20 2025Reply of petitioner Danny Richard Rivers filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 10 2025Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
- Feb 27 2025Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 27 2025Brief amicus curiae of Senator John Cornyn filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 27 2025Brief amici curiae of Arkansas, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 27 2025Brief amici curiae of Pennsylvania, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 27 2025Brief amicus curiae of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 27 2025Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.
- Feb 20 2025Brief of respondent Eric Guerrero, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 19 2025Record received electronically from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas and available with the Clerk.
- Feb 19 2025CIRCULATED
- Feb 18 2025Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
- Feb 13 2025Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
- Feb 10 2025SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 31, 2025.
- Jan 28 2025Brief amici curiae of National Association of Federal Defenders and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
- Jan 28 2025Brief amici curiae of Professor Lee Kovarsky, et al. filed. (Corrected version)
- Jan 28 2025Brief amici curiae of Former Federal Judges filed.
- Jan 28 2025Brief amici curiae of Former Federal and State Prosecutors filed.
- Jan 28 2025Brief amicus curiae of Phillips Black, Inc. filed.
- Jan 28 2025Amici brief of Professor Lee Kovarsky, et al. not accepted for filing. (To be corrected - January 31, 2025)
- Jan 21 2025Brief of petitioner Danny Richard Rivers filed.
- Jan 21 2025Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
- Dec 06 2024Petition GRANTED.
- Dec 02 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2024.
- Nov 18 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2024.
- Nov 14 2024Rescheduled.
- Oct 30 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2024.
- Oct 29 2024Reply of petitioner Danny Richard Rivers filed. (Distributed)
- Oct 11 2024Brief of respondent Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice in opposition filed.
- Aug 30 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 11, 2024.
- Aug 29 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 11, 2024 to October 11, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
- Aug 12 2024Response Requested. (Due September 11, 2024)
- Aug 07 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
- Jul 26 2024Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
- Jul 26 2024Brief amici curiae of Former Federal Judges filed.
- Jul 26 2024Brief amici curiae of Legal Scholars Lee Kovarsky, et al. filed.
- Jun 24 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 26, 2024)