Balentine v. Thaler

2 Citing briefs

  1. Prible v. Thaler

    MOTION for Summary Judgment and Amended Answer, Responding to Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, with Brief in Support

    Filed December 17, 2012

    Because the state court dismissed Prible’s claims on procedural grounds, federal review is barred. See Coleman, 501 U.S. at 726; Rocha, 626 F.3d at 837. 2.

  2. Buck v. Stephens

    MOTION for Relief from Judgment

    Filed September 7, 2011

    Rule 60(b) authority to reopen proceedings and reconsider a denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus is equitable and subject to the Court’s discretion. See Balentine v. Thaler, 626 F.3d 842, 846 (5th Cir. 2010) (“Rule 60(b)(6) is a grand reservoir of equitable power to do justice in a particular case when relief is not warranted by the preceding clauses…”) (emphasis added). To demonstrate “any other reason justifying relief” under Rule 60(b)(6), a petitioner must show “extraordinary circumstances.”