DAYTON-HUDSON CORP.

v.

ALTUS

Citator

Cited By

• Gunn v. Lanson Newsome, 881 F.2d 949 (11th Cir. 1989)
  …ition, his failure to raise the Franklin/Sandstrom claim would constitute an abuse of the writ, unless he were able to present some other “justifiable reason” for omitting the claim. E.g., Tucker v. Kemp, 819 F. 2d 978 (11th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1073, 107 S.Ct. 2472, 96 L.Ed.2d 364 (1987).” The court has discovered that a petitioner’s pro se or counseled status is crucial.2 [*968] In so doing, the court comes to the rather astonishing conclusion that a litigant is more responsible for what his…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Richardson v. Thigpen, 883 F.2d 895 (11th Cir. 1989)
  …e Hitchcock claim in his amended first federal habeas petition. Consequently, we conclude that Richardson has abused the writ by failing to present this claim in his prior petition. See, e.g., Tucker v. Kemp, 819 F. 2d 978 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1073, 107 S.Ct. 2472, 96 L.Ed.2d 364 (1987). See generally Demps v. Dugger, 874 F. 2d at 1391. When a petitioner has abused the writ, a federal court should dismiss the petition unless the “ends of justice” require otherwise. Sanders v. United States, 3…