Filed: Apr. 13, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 13-30981 Document: 00513462755 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/13/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-30981 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED LOUIE M. SCHEXNAYDER, JR., April 13, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Petitioner - Appellant Clerk v. DARREL VANNOY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY, Respondent - Appellee Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:99-CV-93 Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and ELROD, Circuit
Summary: Case: 13-30981 Document: 00513462755 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/13/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-30981 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED LOUIE M. SCHEXNAYDER, JR., April 13, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Petitioner - Appellant Clerk v. DARREL VANNOY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY, Respondent - Appellee Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:99-CV-93 Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and ELROD, Circuit ..
More
Case: 13-30981 Document: 00513462755 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/13/2016
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-30981
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
LOUIE M. SCHEXNAYDER, JR., April 13, 2016
Lyle W. Cayce
Petitioner - Appellant Clerk
v.
DARREL VANNOY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY,
Respondent - Appellee
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:99-CV-93
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The judgment of the district court is vacated and Petitioner’s Rule 60(b)
motion is remanded to that court. Because the federal court has not considered
constitutional claims related to the decisions of the Louisiana courts after the
Louisiana Supreme Court’s judgment in State v. Cordero,
993 So. 2d 203
(La. 2008), the present motion is not successive, but is a true Rule 60(b) motion
entitled to be decided.
Judgment VACATED and Motion REMANDED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.