Also known as:habeas reviews · habeas corpus review
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A judicial proceeding in which a court examines the legality of an individual's detention by the government and may order release if the detention is unlawful. The proceeding requires a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual and legal basis for custody and to obtain relief when detention lacks authorization.
Sources & Authorities· 5 primary sources
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Statutes
Study Supplements
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Detainee Challenges Inadequate Substitute Board
Hyun Han, a foreign analyst seized overseas and held in a naval brig, faces indefinite detention under a statute that routes all challenges to a secret financial review commission. The commission reviews only redacted data, bars new exculpatory audit reports, and lacks power to order release. Han files a habeas petition in federal district court. The court grants relief because the statutory scheme supplies no adequate substitute that permits contesting the basis for detention or obtaining freedom.
Citizen Combatant Seeks Fact Hearing
Harriet Hamilton, a U.S. citizen captured abroad and designated an enemy combatant, remains confined in a military facility without criminal charges. She petitions for habeas corpus and seeks to present evidence rebutting the government's factual assertions. The district court orders an evidentiary hearing so that Hamilton may contest the executive's authority to detain her indefinitely.
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld542 U.S. 507, 124 S. Ct. 2633, 159 L. Ed. 2d 578 (2004)
State Prisoner Barred From Fourth Amendment Claim
Helena Hoffman, convicted in state court after a search she claims violated the Fourth Amendment, seeks federal habeas relief on that ground. State courts had already provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim. The federal court denies the petition because habeas review does not reopen Fourth Amendment issues once the state process was adequate.
Stone v. Powell428 U.S. 465 (1976)
New Constitutional Rule Denied Retroactive Effect
Harper Hill, whose state conviction became final years earlier, files a habeas petition relying on a recently announced constitutional rule that would invalidate his trial. The federal court refuses to apply the new rule because it was not dictated by precedent existing at the time Hill's conviction became final.
Teague v. Lane489 U.S. 288 (1989)
Alien Challenges Prolonged Post-Removal Detention
Hazel Hoffman, an alien ordered removed but still held after six months because no country will accept her, petitions for habeas corpus. She demonstrates that removal is not reasonably foreseeable. The court orders her release because continued detention without a realistic prospect of deportation exceeds statutory authority.
Zadvydas v. Davis533 U.S. 678 (2001), 868
Criminal Alien Detained During Removal Proceedings
Holly Hayes, a lawful permanent resident convicted of an aggravated felony, remains in immigration custody while removal proceedings continue. She petitions for habeas corpus claiming the detention violates due process. The court upholds the detention because Congress may require custody during the limited period needed to complete removal proceedings.
Demore v. Hyung Joon Kim538 U.S. 510, 517 (2003)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
5
What must a statutory substitute for habeas review include to satisfy the Suspension Clause?+
A substitute must permit the detainee to challenge the executive's authority to detain indefinitely, contest the factual findings supporting detention, introduce exculpatory evidence discovered after the initial proceedings, and seek an order of release. A process that bars new evidence, prevents factual contest, or lacks power to order release fails this standard.
When may a federal court deny habeas relief on a Fourth Amendment claim raised by a state prisoner?+
A federal court may deny relief when the state provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim in its own courts. The incremental deterrent value of relitigating the issue on habeas does not justify the costs of releasing guilty defendants.
Does a new constitutional rule announced after a conviction became final apply on habeas review?+
A new rule generally does not apply on habeas review unless it is a substantive rule that places certain conduct beyond the state's power to punish or is a watershed rule of criminal procedure. Most new procedural rules are not retroactive.
How long may the government detain an alien after a final removal order without violating due process?+
Detention is presumptively reasonable for six months. After that period, if removal is not reasonably foreseeable, the government must justify continued custody or release the alien under supervision.
May Congress require detention of criminal aliens throughout removal proceedings?+
Yes. Congress may mandate detention during the relatively brief period needed to complete removal proceedings for aliens convicted of certain crimes. Such detention does not violate due process when it serves the government's interest in ensuring appearance and protecting the community.
. Most notably, § 2243 provides that "the person detained may, under oath, deny any of the facts set forth in the return or allege any other material facts," and § 2246 allows the taking of…
of the Miranda claim. The Court of Appeals relied on the decision of this Court in Fay v. Noia , 372 U.S. 391 (1963). In Fay v. Noia , the Court held that a federal
habeas
corpus
…
habeas corpus review
. Section 1105a was entitled "Judicial
review
of orders of deportation and exclusion" (emphasis added), and the exception for
habeas
corpus
stated that "any alien held in custody pursuant to…
may not constitutionally insist on the same result in its own postconviction proceedings. Pp. 8–14. 2. Miller ’s prohibition on mandatory life without parole for juvenile offenders…
Constitutional LawThe separation of powers · The powers of the presidentUBEFoundational