context: The district court found that Widgery deliberately failed to pursue his appeals from the denials of his second and third motions for new trial.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.parenthetical: "the SS 2255 court may in a proper case deny relief to a federal prisoner who has deliberately bypassed the orderly federal procedures provided * * * by way of appeal"
citation_a.sentence: See Kaufman, 394 U.S. at 227 n. 8, 89 S.Ct. 1074 n. 8 (“the § 2255 court may in a proper case deny relief to a federal prisoner who has deliberately bypassed the orderly federal procedures provided * * * by way of appeal”); see also Little, 608 F.2d at 300. Because of this finding, we need not address whether Widgery must meet the cause and prejudice standard outlined in United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 167-69, 102 S.Ct. 1584, 1594-95, 71 L.Ed.2d 816 (1982).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 745 F.2d 1157, 1160
citation_b.parenthetical: issue of whether cause. and prejudice standard should apply if defendant fails to raise issue on direct appeal will not be considered because the government did not raise the issue below
citation_b.sentence: See Morris v. United States, 687 F.2d 899, 904 (7th Cir.1982) (cause and prejudice standard is applicable in determining whether an issue not raised on direct appeal can be challenged in a 2255 proceeding); see also Earley, 746 F.2d at 415 (circumstances of case render unnecessary a determination of whether the Frady standard applies if defendant fails to raise an issue on direct appeal); United States v. Auerbach, 745 F.2d 1157, 1160 (8th Cir.1984) (issue of whether cause. and prejudice standard should apply if defendant fails to raise issue on direct appeal will not be considered because the government did not raise the issue below).