Ninth Circuit· 3/25/2010

Bailey v. Hill

Citations

599 F.3d 976
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 6183
2010 WL 1133435

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that federal courts lack jurisdiction over habeas corpus 12 || petitions challenging only restitution orders
holding that 7 || district courts lack jurisdiction under § 2254 to hear challenges to restitution orders raised by state 8 | prisoners who do not challenge the lawfulness of their custody under federal law
holding that fines and restitution orders are improper claims under § 2254
explaining that a petitioner held in a state prison 28 satisfies the “in custody” requirement
holding state 21 prisoner’s in-custody challenge to restitution in criminal sentence is not 22 cognizable
explaining that a petitioner held in a state prison 28 satisfies the “in custody” requirement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rymer, Gould, Bybee

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Bailey v. Hill

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.