Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

United States of America v. Ephren Taylor, II

Date: 09-10-2025

Case Number: 14-CR-217

Judge:

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Fulton County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney’s Office in Atlanta

Defendant's Attorney: Click Here For The Best Atlanta Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory

Description:
Atlanta, Georgia criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus.



When it comes to federal habeas petitions, finality matters.

Without it, applications for habeas relief can quickly become un-

wieldy. To promote finality, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death

Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b) and 2255(h),

provides strict gatekeeping requirements for "second or succes-

sive” habeas filings. Exactly when these gatekeeping requirements

kick in is the subject of this appeal, which involves between fifteen

and twenty separate pro se motions and filings across two courts

and three appeals. The lamentable procedural complications here

illustrate just how important these gatekeeping requirements are

for the orderly adjudication of postconviction claims in federal

court.

As e

Outcome:
Denied.



Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of United States of America v. Ephren Taylor, II?

The outcome was: Denied. Affirmed

Which court heard United States of America v. Ephren Taylor, II?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Fulton County), GA.

Who were the attorneys in United States of America v. Ephren Taylor, II?

Plaintiff's attorney: United States District Attorney’s Office in Atlanta. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Atlanta Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory.

When was United States of America v. Ephren Taylor, II decided?

This case was decided on September 10, 2025.