Is a person in custody for the purpose of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 or 28 U.S.C. § 2254 if the individual is still under a direct consequence from the criminal judgment and does the Suspension Clause protect the right to file the writ of habeas corpus?

Questions Presented Lonnie Kade Welsh was convicted as a sex offender in three separate cases. He challenged his convictions under actual innocence based upon new evidence. the evidence was not received by him until weeks before he discharged the prison sentence. He then presented the evidence to the state trial court and to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. After it was declined he moved in the Western District of Texas under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. However, the district court viewed the claim under 28 U.S.C. 2254 and did not issue a ruling on the merits of the case. The district court claimed Welsh was not in custody pursuant to the criminal judgment. Petitioner appealed to the United States of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit refused to issue a Certificate of Appealability claiming the issue did not have an arguabie basis in law. The questions presented for review are: 1. Is A Person In Custody For The Purpose Of Either 28 U.S.C. § 2241 or 28 US.C. § 2254 If The Individual Is Still Under A Direct Consequence From The Criminal Judgment And Does The Suppression Clause Protect The Right To File The Writ Of Habeas Corpus? . ‘2. Is A Person In Custody For The Purpose Of Either 28 U.S.C. § 2241 or 28 U.S.C. § 2254 If The Collateral Disabilities Can Only Be Set Aside If The Conviction Is Overturned And Does The Suppression Clause Protect The Right To File The Writ Of Habeas Corpus? 3. Does A Person Reach A Non-Frivolous Question For The Purpose Of A Certificate Of Appealability If Another Court Has Decided The Same Issue Favorably? 1