United States Third Circuit

Reset A A Font size: Print

Wilson v. Secretary Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 12-2283

In this case, appellant Wilson received writs of habeas corpus vacating two murder convictions, but remained incarcerated since the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania decided to prosecute him anew for both crimes. Wilson subsequently returned to federal court and filed a Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 60(b)(6) motion seeking to bar a retrial. The judgment of the district court denying Wilson's Rule 60(b)(6) motion is affirmed, where: 1) the district court had jurisdiction to adjudicate the Rule 60(b)(6) motion after Wilson had been issued a writ of habeas corpus; and 2) the district court did not err when it required Wilson to exhaust in state court the new claims he raised in his Rule 60(b)(6) motion, as, although the exhaustion requirement in habeas cases recognizes exceptions for "extraordinary circumstances," it presumes adequate state remedies.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 03/16/2015
  • Published 03/16/2015


  • Hardiman


  • United States Third Circuit