Butterworth v. Boutilier

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an order compelling a state prison to transport a prisoner was immediately appealable and reversing the order
• holding that a district court's transportation order permitting a prisoner to obtain neurological testing in search of new evidence to support his habeas petition was not authorized under the All Writs Act or § 2254(e)(2
• noting that “[a] prisoner is ‘at fault’ if he ‘bears responsibility for 2 the failure’ to develop the record.”
• confirming that a federal habeas court “must consider” each AEDPA 24 requirement before permitting evidentiary development
• noting that, under the AEDPA, “[r]eview of factual determinations under § 2254(d)(2) is expressly limited to ‘the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.’”
• explaining that federal habeas review is “limited to the record that was before the state court” (quoting Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170, 181 (2011))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).