Ocie Mills Carey C. Mills v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the “district court properly refused to substantively address the [§ 2255 petitioner’s] remaining contentions” that the appellate court “already rejected”
• concluding that the “district court properly refused to substantively address the [§ 2255 petitioner’s] remaining contentions” that the appellate court “already rejected”
• “[P]rior disposition of a ground of error on direct appeal, in most cases, precludes further review in a subsequent collateral proceeding.”
• “[P]rior disposition of a ground of error on direct appeal, in most cases, precludes further review in a subsequent collateral proceeding.”
• “A ground of error is usually ‘available’ on direct appeal when its merits can be reviewed without further factual development.”
• “[P]rior disposition of a ground of error on direct appeal, in most cases, precludes further review in a subsequent collateral proceeding.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).