Fernandez v. United States · ¶60

The District Court's grant of relief here ran afoul of this principle. Petitioner Joe Fernandez has been litigating the issues at the core of his § 3582(c)(1)(A) motion since his trial. From the start, Fernandez has contended that the evidence against him was weak and that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he (and not someone else) committed the murders for which he was convicted. He raised these issues at his trial, see ante, at 415, at his sentencing, see App. 57–62, in a motion to reconsider his sentence, see ante, at 415–416, and in a postconviction motion under 28 U. S. C. § 2255, even though “[n]o new evidence had surfaced,” ante, at 416–417. Each effort failed in the trial court and on appeal. Yet these same arguments finally found success under § 3582(c)(1)(A) based on the District Court's renewed feelings of “ `doub[t]' ” and “ `disquiet' ” about…

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