Morrison v. U.S. Parole Commission

How courts have described this case

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

• “[B]ecause § 23-110 provides an adequate remedy for [Petitioner] to challenge the legality of his conviction and sentence, the Court does not have jurisdiction to consider the merits of his claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Rahim v. U.S. Parole Commission
  District of Columbia· 2015-01-07· cited 18×
• Reed v. Thomas
  D.C. Circuit· 2018-02-15· cited 3×
• Floyd v. United States Parole Commission
  District of Columbia· 2015-09-14
• Reed v. Thomas
  District of Columbia· 2018-02-15
• Reed v. Whitmer
  District of Columbia· 2023-04-17
• Shakur v. Warden
  District of Columbia· 2023-08-25

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Preiser v. Rodriguez
  Supreme Court· 1973-05-07· cited 9,100×
• Schriro v. Landrigan
  Supreme Court· 2007-05-14· cited 3,241×
• Wilkinson v. Dotson
  Supreme Court· 2005-03-07· cited 2,909×
• Swain v. Pressley
  Supreme Court· 1977-03-22· cited 503×
• Lane v. Williams
  Supreme Court· 1982-05-03· cited 490×
• Wilton Chatman-Bey v. Richard Thornburgh, Attorney General of the United States
  D.C. Circuit· 1988-12-23· cited 336×
• Blair-Bey v. Quick
  D.C. Circuit· 1998-07-24· cited 286×
• Williams v. Martinez
  D.C. Circuit· 2009-11-13· cited 187×
• Lester D. Milhouse v. Edward H. Levi, United States Attorney General
  D.C. Circuit· 1976-12-13· cited 64×
• Gorbey v. United States
  District of Columbia· 2014-07-17· cited 16×
• Taylor v. United States Parole Commission
  District of Columbia· 2012-05-07· cited 10×
• Bradley v. United States Parole Commission
  District of Columbia· 2013-01-17· cited 2×