Ad
related to: successful habeas corpus cases pleasepdffiller.com has been visited by 1M+ users in the past month
A tool that fits easily into your workflow - CIOReview
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Please introduce links to this page from ; try the Find link tool for suggestions. ( March 2022 ) This is a list of cases concerning criminal law heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in its original habeas jurisdiction granted by § 14 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 , 1 Stat. 73, 81–82.
In his decision, U.S. District Judge David M. Lawson granted the writ of habeas corpus petition and explored alternative theories as to how the bottle could have ended up at the scene, noting that ...
In United States law, habeas corpus (/ ˈ h eɪ b i ə s ˈ k ɔːr p ə s /) is a recourse challenging the reasons or conditions of a person's confinement under color of law.A petition for habeas corpus is filed with a court that has jurisdiction over the custodian, and if granted, a writ is issued directing the custodian to bring the confined person before the court for examination into ...
Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (1973), was a decision of the US Supreme Court regarding the statutory jurisdiction of federal district courts to grant writs of habeas corpus for guaranteeing the right of state prisoners to receive a speedy trial in another state under the Speedy Trial Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution.
This category is for articles about court cases that interpret the statutes and procedures that govern habeas corpus petitions in the United States.Cases in which habeas was merely the process by which the case reached the court, but which did not include a substantive discussion of habeas corpus itself, should not be included.
Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963), was a 1963 United States Supreme Court case concerning habeas corpus.In a majority opinion authored by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., the Court held that state prisoners were entitled to access to habeas relief in federal court, even if they did not pursue a remedy in state court that was not available to them at the time.
Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the application of newly announced rules of law in habeas corpus proceedings. This case addresses the Federal Court's threshold standard of deciding whether Constitutional claims will be heard.
Justice Felix Frankfurter concurring in Brown notes the "uniqueness" of habeas corpus is its availability to "bring into question the legality of a person's restraint and to require justification for such detention". [3] Justice Chase said habeas corpus has long been considered "the best and only sufficient defence of personal freedom".