Wilson v. Secretary Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a conflicting decision from another circuit “demonstrates that the issue [the petitioner] presents is debatable among jurists of reason” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• holding that a conflicting decision from the Sixth Circuit “demonstrates that the issue [the petitioner] presents is debatable among jurists of -6- reason” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• stating that a contrary United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decision demonstrates that jurists of reason would debate the issue
• stating that, “[b]y requiring exhaustion, federal courts recognize that state courts, no less than federal courts, are bound to safeguard the federal rights of state criminal defendants”
• addressing Rule 60(b) in the context of a habeas case arising under § 2254

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).