Kenneth Lee v. William Stickman Stephen Zappala, Jr. Michael Fisher

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an 8-year delay in reaching the merits of a post-conviction petition constitute inordinate delay
• concluding that it was “clear” the petitioner was “‘in custody’ for purposes of the habeas statute” when he was on probation at the time he filed his petition
• explaining that “being on probation meets the ‘in custody’ requirement for purposes of the habeas statute”
• explaining that “being on probation meets the ‘in custody’ requirement for purposes of the habeas statute”
• explaining that “being on probation meets the ‘in custody’ requirement for purposes of the habeas statute”
• explaining that “being on probation meets the ‘in custody’ requirement for purposes of the habeas statute”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).