Hulett Foster v. Glynn Booher, Warden
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
LUCERO, Circuit Judge.
Garlotte v. Fordice holds that, for purposes of habeas corpus jurisdiction, a prisoner that is “in custody” for one of a series of consecutive sentences is “in custody” for all of those sentences. 515 U.S. 39, 41, 115 S.Ct. 1948, 132 L.Ed.2d 36 (1995). Foster appeals the district court’s conclusion that it lacked jurisdiction over his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition because Garlotte does not apply to consecutive sentences that have been imposed by different courts at different times. Under our jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and § 2253(a), we grant a certificate of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Spencer v. KemnaSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Maleng v. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Carafas v. LaValleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Peyton v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Robert Defoy v. John M. McCullough Superintendent: Gerald J. Pappert, Att. General: Pennsylvania Board of Probation and ParoleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Mays v. DinwiddieCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Ruben Diaz v. State of Florida Fourth Judicial CircuitCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
- United States v. VaughnCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015
- Brown v. Warden, Springfield Medical Center for Federal PrisonersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.