McCarthan v. Warden

En Banc Brief of Amici Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner-Appellant.

Brief filed: 08/22/2016

Documents

McCarthan v. Warden

11th Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. 12-14989-C

Prior Decision

On Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, No. 5:09-cv-00110-WTH-PRL, 11th Cir. Panel decision available at 811 F.3d 1237 (11th Cir. Jan. 20, 2016)

Argument(s)

Section 2255 relief is "inadequate or ineffective" if the petitioner does not have a "genuine opportunity" to challenge his sentence. The weight of appellate authority suggests that a section 2255 proceeding is "inadequate or ineffective" if the petitioner lacks a "genuine opportunity" to challenge his sentence. The Savings Clause’s text, structure, and history confirm the majority view. An opportunity to challenge a sentence is not genuine if the challenge would have been futile. McCarthan never had a "genuine opportunity" to challenge his sentence. The Savings Clause opens the door to sentencing challenges, not just challenges to the execution of a sentence or when the sentencing court no longer exists. NACDL’s proposed test would not raise policy concerns.

Coronavirus Resources

NACDL to Focus on Service and Support for Members, Clients, and Community Throughout Virus Emergency

Learn More

Author(s)

David C. Frederick and Jeffrey A. Love, Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, P.L.L.C., Washington, DC; H. Eugene Lindsey III, NACDL, Miami, FL.