Abu-Ali Abdur'rahman v. Bell

Abu-Ali Abdur'Rahman (petitioner) was convicted of first-degree murder. His ineffective-assistance and prosecutorial-misconduct claims were rejected by the Tennessee Supreme Court and then barred on procedural grounds in federal district court, which deemed them exhausted. While his certiorari petition was pending, the Tennessee Supreme Court adopted Rule 39, providing that litigants need not seek discretionary review from that court to exhaust their claims. The petitioner then filed a Rule 60(b) motion re-presenting his exhausted claims; the district court denied it, treating the Rule 60(b) motion as a second or successive habeas petition.

Whether a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion, filed in a habeas proceeding to inform a federal court of a state court's interpretation of a new state procedural rule, constitutes a 'successive' habeas corpus petition.