Michael Hayes v. Edward L. Evans Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a petitioner must \exhaust his state court remedies with respect to his new conviction [after a retrial] before he can bring a challenge in federal court.\
• holding § 2254 must be dismissed as moot when the challenged state conviction was reversed by state appellate court prior to a decision in the § 2254 action
• suggesting a habeas action might lie if a delay in decision of a direct appeal prejudiced the petitioner’s ability to defend himself on retrial but such an action should be brought as a challenge to the retrial proceedings
• habeas petitioner’s § 2254 petition was rendered moot where state appellate court reversed the petitioner’s conviction and granted the petitioner a new trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).