United States v. John Herman Thiele

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that even if the challenge to restitution comes with other challenges to the sentence, the restitution challenge cannot be brought under § 2255
• holding that the habeas petitioner could not collaterally attack his restitution order in a § 2255 motion because while “[c]laims seeking release from custody can be brought under § 2255[,] claims seeking other relief cannot”
• holding that the habeas petitioner could not collaterally attack his restitution order in a § 2255 motion, because, while “[c]laims seeking release from custody can be brought under § 2255[,] claims seeking other relief cannot”
• holding petitioner could not 11 collaterally attack restitution order under § 2255, even where joined with cognizable 12 claims for release from custody
• concluding relief from restitution is not a cognizable claim under § 2255 even when presented with a cognizable claim or as an ineffective-assistance claim
• writing that cognizable claims “do not run interference for non-cognizable claims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).