Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
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. That section provides:
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 ...
Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that foreign nationals held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp could petition federal courts for writs of habeas corpus to review the legality of their detention. [1]
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.
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]
Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170, is a 2011 United States Supreme Court case concerning evidentiary development in federal habeas corpus proceedings. Oral arguments in the case took place on November 9, 2010, and the Supreme Court issued its decision on April 4, 2011.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, a federal court hearing a habeas petition from a state prisoner must presume that the state court decided the prisoner's federal claim on the merits, even if the state court did not expressly address that federal claim.