Jobe v. Commissioner of Correction

Summary

The court held that the petitioner properly raised his expansive custody argument in a reply brief because it responded to a new jurisdictional argument raised by the respondent, although the Appellate Court's refusal to consider it was harmless. The court nevertheless affirmed dismissal because federal immigration detention based on an expired state conviction did not satisfy the statutory custody requirement, and the 2006 statutory amendment changed filing location rather than expanding habeas jurisdiction.