Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 50 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Marcus Hahn v. Bonita Moseley.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Marcus Hahn v. Bonita Moseley Anchor | green | “generally, defendants who are convicted in federal court must pursue habeas relief from their convictions and sentences through the procedures set out in 28 u.s.c. 2255 .” | 19 |
| 2 | Marcus Hahn v. Bonita Moseley | green | “nonetheless, 2255 includes a 'savings clause' that preserves the availability of 2241 relief when 2255 proves inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of a prisoner's detention.” | 16 |
| 3 | In Re: Byron Jones, A/K/A Carl Lee, A/K/A B, Movant | green | “when 2255 proves inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of . . . detention,' a federal prisoner may seek a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 2241.” | 15 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.