Reyes-Requena v. U.S.

1 Citing brief

  1. USA v. Gupta

    MEMORANDUM in Opposition

    Filed April 2, 2015

    This extremely narrow test is satisfied only if the petitioner can demonstrate that his acts “have been ruled not to constitute criminal conduct.” Underwood v. United States, 166 F.3d 84, 88 (2d Cir. 1999); see also Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001) (petitioner must establish that he or she “may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense”). For example, in Bousley, the Supreme Court remanded the case for a determination whether the petitioner had satisfied the “actual innocence” test.