William Cody v. Robert J. Henderson, Warden, Auburn Correctional Facility

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “the remedy of unconditional release is not available unless the appeal has been tainted,” and vacating the district court’s erroneous grant of unconditional release to a habeas petitioner
• “remand[ing] the case to allow Cody the option of recasting his habeas corpus petition as a suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983”
• “Certainly, the differences in a defendant’s situation before trial and after conviction suggest that at the very least the Barker factors should not be applied uncritically.”
• “The Supreme Court has not yet directly addressed the issue of whether the Constitution guarantees a speedy criminal appeal, once an opportunity for an appeal is provided.”
• “Diaz and Simmons clearly stand for the proposition that unconditional release from custody is not an appropriate remedy unless [a petitioner] can demonstrate that appellate delay caused substantial prejudice to the disposition of his appeal.”
• “unconditional release is not available unless the appeal has been tainted”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).