Muth v. Fondren

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that petitioner was not entitled to application of the § 2255 escape hatch where his 28 claim of actual innocence was contradicted by his guilty plea
• finding that petitioner was not entitled to application of the 10 § 2255 escape hatch where his claim of actual innocence was contradicted by his guilty plea
• finding that petitioner was not entitled to application of the 16 § 2255 escape hatch where his claim of actual innocence was contradicted by his guilty plea
• finding that petitioner was not entitled to application of the 27 § 2255 escape hatch where his claim of actual innocence was contradicted by his guilty plea
• finding that petitioner was not entitled to 13 application of the § 2255 escape hatch where his claim of actual innocence was contradicted by 14 his guilty plea
• “A motion under § 2255 is generally the exclusive remedy for a federal prisoner who seeks to challenge the legality of confinement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).