Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Habeas corpus (/ ˈ h eɪ b i ə s ˈ k ɔːr p ə s / ⓘ; from Medieval Latin, lit. ' you should have the body ') [1] is an equitable remedy [2] by which a report can be made to a court alleging the unlawful detention or imprisonment of an individual, and requesting that the court order the individual's custodian (usually a prison official) to bring the prisoner to court, to determine ...
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 ...
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.
The Habeas Corpus Act of 1867 (sess. ii, chap. 28, 14 Stat. 385) is an act of Congress that significantly expanded the jurisdiction of federal courts to issue writs of habeas corpus. [1]
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which limits habeas corpus judicial review of the decisions of immigration officers, violates the Suspension Clause of Article One of the U.S. Constitution.
The Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, 12 Stat. 755 (1863), entitled An Act relating to Habeas Corpus, and regulating Judicial Proceedings in Certain Cases, was an Act of Congress that authorized the president of the United States to suspend the right of habeas corpus in response to the American Civil War and provided for the release of political prisoners.
Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, ruling that criminal defendants sentenced to death may not be executed if they do not understand the reason for their imminent execution, and that once the state has set an execution date death-row inmates may litigate their competency to be executed in habeas corpus proceedings. [1]
Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), was a tax case before the United States Supreme Court that is notable for the following holdings: . A pro rata stock dividend where a shareholder received no actual cash or other property and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend by the shareholder was not income to the shareholder under ...