Spaulding v. United States

710 F. App'x 430
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJanuary 30, 2018
DocketNo. 16-11641 Non-Argument Calendar
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 710 F. App'x 430 (Spaulding v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Spaulding v. United States, 710 F. App'x 430 (11th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Asha Spaulding appeals pro se the sua sponte denial of her motion to vacate. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court denied Spaulding’s motion based on her written plea agreement to waive her right to collaterally attack her convictions and sentence in a postconviction proceeding. The Supreme Court instructed in Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198, 126 S.Ct. 1675, 164 L.Ed.2d 376 (2006), that “a court must accord the parties fair notice and an opportunity to present their positions” before disposing of a case on a ground not raised in their filings, id. at 210, 126 S.Ct. 1675. Because the district court denied Spauld-ing’s postconviction motion without giving her an opportunity to respond to the effect of her waiver, we vacate and remand for the district court to proceed in accordance with the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Day v. McDonough
547 U.S. 198 (Supreme Court, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
710 F. App'x 430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spaulding-v-united-states-ca11-2018.