In Re Maestro M. Faison, aka Maestro Matthew Faison

3). The United States Appeals Court, Eleventh Circuit, has created a Certified Questions ” resolving clause [?]: 4). The United States Appeals Court Eleventh Circuit has stated inside a title 28 U.S.C. 2244(b). Of the recent decision, Erlinger V. U.S.. 144 S.Ct. 1852-53 (2024). Saying for a new rule to be retroactive under § 2254 or 2255, the Supreme Court itself must expressly hold that the new rule is retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review, or the Supreme Court’s holdings in multiple cases can, together, “necessarity dictate retroactivity of the new rule, as the Eleventh Circuit reliance was Tyler V. Cain 533 u.S. at 666 : 5). The Eleventh Circuit U.S. Appeals Court voiced the Supreme Court did not address whether Erlinger is retroactive applicable to cases on collateral review. 6). Respect to recent decision inside Supreme Court on Erlinger. decision when the Jurists voiced the TEAGE, rule does not bar, because of today’s new rule in collateral proceedings, cf. Stanely V. State. 934 So.2d 562 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). 7). In the United States V. Haymond, 588 U.S. 634, 645-646 (2019). Court Room on the contrary other constitutional cases that the court similarly did not involve the recidivism “tes[t].”