Citation network
Preiser Vs. Rodriguez
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 07, 1973
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 475 (1973) U.S. Supreme Court Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
U.S. 475 (1973) Preiser v. RodriguezSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
if a remedy under the Civil Rights Act is available, a plaintiff need not first seek redress in a state forum. Monroe v. PapeSearch
-
McNeese v. BoardSearch
-
King v. SmithSearch
-
elease from penal custody is not an available remedy under the Civil Rights Act.' Peinado v. AdultSearch
-
of Dept. of Corrections, 405 F.2d 1185, 1186 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 968 (1969). In Johnson v. WalkerSearch
-
Rodriguez v. McGinnisSearch
-
the state courts, and had made no showing that an adequate state remedy was unavailable. United States ex rel. Katzoff v. McGinnisSearch
-
upon consideration of the merits and upon the authority of Wilwording v. SwensonSearch
-
they were not subject to any requirement of exhaustion of state remedies. We granted certiorari sub nom. Oswald v. RodriguezSearch
-
Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch 75, 8 U. S. 95 (1807). See Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
and Waley v. JohnstonSearch
-
U. S. 101 (1942). See also Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
he is unlawfully confined in the wrong institution, as in In re Bonner, 151 U. S. 242 (1894), and Humphrey v. CadySearch
-
that he was denied his constitutional rights at trial, as in Johnson v. ZerbstSearch
-
that his guilty plea was invalid, as in Von Moltke v. GilliesSearch
-
that he is being unlawfully detained by the Executive or the military, as in Parisi v. DavidsonSearch
-
or that his parole was unlawfully revoked, causing him to be reincarcerated in prison, as in Morrissey v. BrewerSearch
-
custody, but that the writ is available as well to attack future confinement and obtain future releases. In Peyton v. RoweSearch
-
Id. at 391 U. S. 66 -67. See also Walker v. WainwrightSearch
-
conviction without first giving the state court system an opportunity to correct its own constitutional errors. Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
habeas corpus actions is rooted in considerations of federal state comity. That principle was defined in Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
are not limited to challenges to the validity of state court convictions is evidenced by cases such as Morrissey v. BrewerSearch
-
under the Civil Rights Act in federal court without any requirement of prior exhaustion of state remedies. Cf. Ray v. FritzSearch
-
Harris v. NelsonSearch
-
and Hensley Page 411 U. S. 496 v. MunicipalSearch
-
d). See Salinger v. LoiselSearch
-
Coogan v. CincinnatiSearch
-
Jenson v. OlsonSearch
-
Rhodes v. MeyerSearch
-
Goss v. IllinoisSearch
-
of state prisoners to bring federal civil rights actions to challenge the conditions of their confinement. Cooper v. PateSearch
-
life, but not to the fact or length of his custody. Upon that understanding, we reaffirm those holdings. Cf. Humphrey v. CadySearch
-
This is not to say that habeas corpus may not also be available to challenge such prison conditions. See Johnson v. AverySearch
-
and ad faciendum et recipiendum. See Fay v. NoiaSearch
-
Rex v. ClarksonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial