Legal Opinion
United States v. Bernard Barney Kramer
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 18, 1999No. 98-16849PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SILVERMAN, Circuit Judge:
We hold today that a defendant seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 not only must be in custody, he also must claim the right to be released from custody. In this case, the defendant’s § 2255 motion sought only vacatur of a restitution order, not his release from custody. Consequently, the district court ruled that § 2255 relief was not available to him, and denied the mo tion. We agree with the district court, and affirm. We also decline to address the defendant’s other claims of error because they were not included in the certificate of appealability issued by this…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Todd Hiivala v. Tana WoodCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Diane Barnickel v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- United States v. Joe Clinton SeglerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- Smullen v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
- United States v. Lloyd D. WatrobaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Bailey v. HillCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Barrett N. Weinberger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- John F. Kaminski v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- United States v. John Herman ThieleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. RutiglianoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2018
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.