Bowe v. United States · ¶92

So too here. To be sure, unlike Castro, Bowe's case has moved through the initial procedure for second or successive motions—that is, Bowe comes to us after first requesting authorization from a three-judge panel in the Court of Appeals. But, just like Castro, the three-judge panel never made a “statutorily relevant” denial of Bowe's authorization request. To do so, the panel would have had to go through the applicable statutory criteria and determine whether Bowe's successive motion satisfied the conditions of §§ 2255(h)(1) and (h)(2). Because the panel never made such a determination, it neither granted nor denied Bowe's authorization request, as required to bar our review under § 2244(b)(3)(E).

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.