Fourth Circuit· 9/7/2010

Rice v. Rivera

Citations

617 F.3d 802
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 18697
2010 WL 3474802

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that “[e]very federal appellate court has a special obligation to satisfy itself not only of its own jurisdiction, but also that of the lower courts in a cause under review” (internal quotation marks omitted)
recognizing that “[e]very federal appellate court has a special obligation to satisfy itself not only of its own jurisdiction, but also that of the lower courts in a cause under review” (internal quotation marks omitted)
stating that “it is well established that defendants convicted in federal court are obliged to seek habeas relief from their convictions and sentences through § 2255”
noting that the Supreme Court has concluded “that Rule 33 is a nonjurisdictional claim-processing rule” and signaled “its implicit approval of a district court’s jurisdiction to entertain an untimely Rule 33 motion”
providing that if a federal prisoner brings a § 2241 petition that does not fall within the scope of the savings clause, the district court must dismiss the unauthorized habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction
“Claim-processing rules ... are to be rigidly applied when invoked by a litigant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Michael, Motz, King

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.