Louis C. Ostrer v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that Fed. R. App. P. 23(b) governs “[t]he custody of habeas petitioners during the pendency of their habeas proceedings”
• noting that a habeas petitioner seeking bail is on much weaker footing than a “pretrial accused who is presumptively innocent” or even a “convicted defendant on direct appeal”
• explaining that “[t]he effect of the mandate is to bring the proceedings in a case on appeal ... to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction of [the court of appeals], returning it to the forum whence it came”
• explaining that “[t]he effect of the mandate is to bring the proceedings in a case on appeal . . . to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction of [the court of appeals], returning it to the forum whence it came”
• noting that such directives (“[t]raditionally . . . ha[ve] come to mean that based on [the Second Circuit’s] careful review of all points raised by the appellant, [it is] satisfied (1) that [it] would not change its decision upon rehearing, much less hear the case en banc, and (2
• “The district court has inherent power to enter an order affecting the custody of a habeas petitioner who is properly before it contesting the legality of his custody.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).