Legal Opinion
United States v. Stewart
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided December 11, 2015No. Criminal No. 1984-0073PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RICHARD W. ROBERTS, Chief Judge
Pro se defendant Willie Stewart contends that a warrant issued by the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) on September 11, 2012, for an alleged violation of his special parole conditions is invalid because he claims the warrant was issued after he had completed his underlying sentence. He seeks a writ of mandamus directing the- Commission to provide him with a prompt hearing on the alleged violation and a writ of habeas corpus freeing him from any confinement ordered after such a hearing since the confinement would stem from what he…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Moody v. DaggettSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Peyton v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sweeney v. United States Parole CommissionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- United States v. ForrestCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- United States v. ForrestDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018