Tenth Circuit· 12/7/2005

Wilson v. Jones

Citations

430 F.3d 1113
2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 26655
2005 WL 3307368

How courts have described this case

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

stating that petitioner’s “misconduct conviction infringed a liberty interest because it reduced his credit earning class in a manner that inevitably affected the duration of his sentence” (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted)
ruling a § 2241 petitioner was “entitled to due process before he is subjected to . . . disciplinary actions that ‘inevitably affect the duration of his sentence’” (quoting Sandlin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484, 487 (1995)
noting habeas petitioner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is required to first exhaust available state remedies, absent showing of futility
noting habeas petitioner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is required to first exhaust available state remedies, absent showing of futility
noting habeas petitioner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is required to first exhaust available state remedies, absent showing of futility
noting habeas petitioner seeking relief under § 2241 is required to first exhaust available state remedies, absent a showing of futility

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Henry, Holloway, Lucero

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

Other cases named Wilson v. Jones

33 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.