U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, 1998

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Tannenbaum’s § 2255 motion because he could not show actual innocence sufficient to overcome his procedural default. His admission that he knowingly carried a loaded gun during the drug transaction satisfied the carrying prong, which Bailey did not alter.

The court held that it had interlocutory jurisdiction to review the legal basis for denying qualified immunity and that GJR’s complaint did not adequately allege an equal protection violation or another constitutional claim against the individual defendants.