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 ...
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]
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 ...
United States courts are authorized by statute (28 USC §2241 pursuant to §2254) to grant habeas relief to prisoners who have been convicted by a state court. [ 2 ] 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 ...
While habeas corpus can be filed in state or federal court, all state avenues must be exhausted first. In the United States federal court system the writ of habeas corpus is used most frequently to review state court convictions. Federal statutes (28 U.S.C. §§ 2241–2256) outline the procedural aspects of federal habeas corpus proceedings. [10]
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.
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), was a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court held that "in order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a §1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal ...