Howard H. Steverson v. Paul G. Summers

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming the dismissal of a habeas petition on jurisdictional grounds because, “though currently in federal custody,” the petitioner was not “subject to any unexpired state sentences.”
• affirming the dismissal of a habeas petition on jurisdictional grounds because, “though currently in federal custody,” the petitioner was not “subject to any unexpired state sentences.”
• affirming the dismissal of a habeas petition on jurisdictional grounds because, “though currently in federal custody,” the petitioner was not “subject to any unexpired state sentences.”
• “Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is essentially equivalent to § 2254, the former being a postconviction remedy for federal prisoners and the latter available to ‘a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.’”
• “Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is essentially equivalent to § 2254, the former being a postconviction remedy for federal prisoners and the latter available to ‘a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.’”
• “Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is essentially equivalent to § 2254, the former being a postconviction remedy for federal prisoners and the latter available to ‘a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).