Bowe v. United States

Background

Michael Bowe is serving a 24-year federal sentence after pleading guilty in 2008 to conspiracy and attempted Hobbs Act robbery and to using a firearm in connection with those offenses. Later decisions (Davis and Taylor) cast doubt on whether his convictions qualified as the statutorily required “crime of violence,” so Bowe sought postconviction relief under 28 U.S.C. §2255. He repeatedly asked the Eleventh Circuit for permission to file a second or successive motion; panels denied or dismissed those requests, often citing an old‑claim rule in 28 U.S.C. §2244(b)(1). Circuits split on whether that old‑claim bar applies to federal prisoners.

Reasoning

The Court addressed two questions: whether it could review appeals panels’ denials of authorization, and whether §2244(b)(1)’s old‑claim bar applies to federal prisoners’ successive §2255 motions. The majority said the Court has jurisdiction because §2255(h)’s narrow cross‑reference to §2244 does not clearly import §2244(b)(3)(E)’s certiorari bar. It then read §2244(b)(1)’s text and concluded that its reference to “applications under section 2254” targets state habeas applications, not federal §2255 motions. The Eleventh Circuit’s judgment was vacated and the case remanded for reconsideration under the proper standard.

Real world impact

Federal prisoners can now seek this Court’s review of appellate panels’ denials of authorization when those panels apply the wrong standards. The Eleventh Circuit must reconsider whether Bowe may file a second or successive §2255 motion under the proper §2255(h) standard. This ruling does not decide the merits; any later §2255 motion must still meet strict timing and substance requirements in federal law. The decision could affect others challenging older §924(c) sentences, but relief is not automatic.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Jackson concurred, agreeing with the result but offering a different view about §2244(b)(3)(E)’s purpose. Justice Gorsuch dissented, arguing §2244(b)(3)(E) bars certiorari for federal prisoners and that §2244(b)(1) should block repeat federal do‑over claims.