Daniel v. Crusenbury

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “The writ of habeas corpus cannot . . . be used as a substitute for an appeal” and that “[w]here the proceedings leading to the petitioner’s detention are not void by reason of matters apparent on the face of the record, the petitioner’s remedy is by way of appeal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).