Daniel Clark Medberry v. James Crosby

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that state prisoner cannot overcome the procedural requirements of § 2254 by labeling his petition as one under § 2241
• holding that habeas petition brought by state prisoner serving state sentence who is challenging loss of gain time resulting from state prison disciplinary proceeding, is construed as being filed under both 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and § 2254
• explaining that a pretrial detainee in state court should file a § 2241 petition, not a § 2254 petition
• explaining that section 2254 and its requirements apply to “a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a [s]tate court” (emphasis and quotation omitted)
• explaining that a pretrial detainee in state court should file a § 2241 petition, not a § 2254 petition
• explaining that a pretrial detainee in state court should file a § 2241 petition, not a § 2254 petition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).