Joseph Fama v. Commissioner of Correctional Services

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, where the jurisdictional issue is statutory, avoiding the question is not proscribed by Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998)
• holding that, where the jurisdictional issue is statutory, avoiding the question is not proscribed by Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998)
• noting that “[t]o have exhausted claims in state court, petitioner must have ‘fairly presented’ each federal claim to the highest state court.” (emphasis added) (quoting Picard, 505 U.S. at 275)
• stating that 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255 are generally seen as in pari materia” and therefore “the reasoning of [cases] in the context of § 2255 petitions applies equally to § 2254 petitions”
• stating that 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255 are generally seen as in pari materia” and therefore “the reasoning of [cases] in the context of § 2255 petitions applies equally to § 2254 petitions”
• stating that 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255 are “generally seen as in pari materia” and therefore “the reasoning of [cases] in the context of § 2255 petitions applies equally to § 2254 petitions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).