Luster v. West Palm Beach Housing Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, “to challenge [an] Alaska conviction under § 2254, [a petitioner] must demonstrate that (1) he was ‘in custody’ at the time he filed his § 2254 petition, and (2) that custody was ‘pursuant to’ the Alaska judgment.” (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a))
• to challenge a state conviction under § 2254, petitioner “must demonstrate that (1) he 24 was ‘in custody’ at the time he filed his § 2254 petition, and (2
• “[T]he challenged judgment must be the source of the petitioner’s custody.”
• to 25 challenge a state conviction under § 2254, petitioner “must demonstrate that (1) he was ‘in custody’ at 26 the time he filed his § 2254 petition, and (2) that custody was ‘pursuant to’ the [state court] 27 judgment”
• “[T]here must be a nexus between ‘the judgment 8 of a State court’ the petitioner is challenging and the ‘custody’ upon which the 9 petitioner relies to establish jurisdiction. Put differently, the challenged judgment 10 must be ‘the source of the petitioner’s custody.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).