With respect to this issue, I am of the opinion that the approach taken by Warren C.J.U.S. in Peyton v. Rowe (1968), 391 U.S. 54, 20 L. Ed. (2d) 426, 88 S. Ct. 1549, is apt. In that case he said [per U.S. headnote]: The writ of habeas corpus is not a static, narrow formalistic remedy and its scope has continually developed in order that it constantly protect individuals against the erosion of the right to be free from wrongful restraints on their liberty.
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.