Neuwelt v. 33072 Owners Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Rule 4 contemplates that a § 2254 petition will be judged on its face, along with any attached exhibits
• holding that court of appeals cannot dismiss first habeas petition for special ad hoc equitable reasons, including a mere delay, beyond the framework embodied in statutes, rules, and precedent
• holding that, in ruling on prisoner’s first federal habeas petition, a court cannot ignore established “statutes, rules, precedents and practices” and dismiss the petition for ad hoc equitable reasons
• recognizing that a departure from the procedural rules governing first habeas petitions could violate due process and that the same could be true “[eJven in the context of second or successive petitions”
• recognizing in a § 2254 action that “the writ has evolved into an instrument that now demands ... conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction”
• recognizing the “common practice of substitution specialized capital counsel for habeas” as an essential consideration in the development of “fair and effective” habeas reform

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).