Legal Opinion
Meechaicum v. Fountain
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided April 29, 1982No. 82-1328PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
SAFFELS, District Judge.
Petitioner, having paid the necessary fee, has filed with the Clerk of the Court this “complaint” seeking declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241, 2254. The action is properly construed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the state’s denial of release on bail pending extradition. Having examined the pleadings and all materials filed, and having heard oral argument of counsel for petitioner and for respondents, the Court makes…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Carlson v. LandonSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Atkins v. People Of MichiganCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Kendall Brown v. John Wilmot, Superintendent of Elmira Correction Center, and Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of the State of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Grano v. StateSuperior Court of Delaware · 1969
- State v. Second Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1970
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Prasan Meechaicum v. James H. Fountain, Sheriff of Reno County, Kansas and J. Stanley Hill, District Judge, 27th Judicial DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1983
- People v. Superior Court (Ruiz)California Court of Appeal · 1986
- In re BastoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985