Washington v. Sobina

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “a state prisoner challenging the validity or execution of his state court sentence must rely on the more specific provisions of § 2254 rather than § 2241”
• noting that “a state prisoner challenging the validity or execution of his state court sentence must rely on the more specific provisions of § 2254 rather than § 2241”
• noting that “a state prisoner challenging the validity or execution of his state court sentence must rely on the more specific provisions of § 2254 rather than § 2241”
• noting that “the United States Supreme Court ge land [the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit] have repeatedly held,” in the context of ... 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(2
• noting that we defer to implicit as well as explicit factual findings
• “We have held that a state prisoner challenging the validity or execution of his state court sentence must rely on the more specific provisions of §2254 rather than §2241.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).