×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Clemency Challenge Must be Under Habeas
The plaintiff, scheduled for execution, complained that the Governor who passed on his clemency application was the Attorney General at the time of prior proceedings in his case. Since his underlying claim in the clemency application concerned error at trial, the relief he sought (stay of execution until his clemency petition could be considered by someone else) was really habeas relief that could not be obtained under 1983, and was also a successive habeas motion barred by statute since the Supreme Court had rejected his claims. See: Buchanan v. Gilmore, 139 F.3d 982 (4th Cir. 1998).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Buchanan v. Gilmore
| Year | 1998 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 139 F.3d 982 (4th Cir. 1998) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
| Injunction Status | N/A |