Joseph Coady v. Donald T. Vaughn the District Attorney of the County of Montgomery the Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that state prisoners “challenging the execution of [their] sentence” must rely on Section 2254 and not 28 U.S.C. §2241 to obtain habeas relief
• determining that jurisdiction to entertain state prisoner’s habeas petition challenging denial of parole lies under Section 2254
• noting that state prisoners who wish to challenge the execution of their sentence must proceed under § 2254
• noting that state prisoners who wish to challenge the execution of their sentence must proceed under §2254
• noting that jurisdiction to review a state prisoner’s habeas petition challenging denial of parole lies under § 2254(a)
• noting that § 2241 confers habeas corpus jurisdiction over petitions by federal prisoners challenging the execution of their sentences

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).