Jobe v. Commissioner of Correction

Summary

The court held that the petitioner properly raised his expansive custody argument in reply because the respondent first presented the jurisdictional issue after the opening brief, although the appellate court’s refusal to consider that argument was harmless. It affirmed dismissal because federal immigration detention resulting from an expired state conviction did not satisfy the statutory custody requirement, and the 2006 amendment changed filing location rather than expanding habeas jurisdiction.