In Peyton v. Rowe, 391 U.S. 54 (1968), the Court held that a prisoner who was serving two consecutive sentences could challenge the validity of the second sentence through a habeas corpus petition even though he was still serving the first sentence. The Court overruled McNally v. Hill, 293 U.S. 131 (1934), which had created the "prematurity doctrine" by holding that the federal habeas corpus statute did not allow attacks upon future consecutive sentences. Peyton, 391 U.S. at 67. The Peyton Court reasoned that delaying habeas corpus proceedings until the allegedly unlawful sentence commenced would prejudice both parties' ability to present evidence on the merits of the petitioner's claims. Id. at 62-63. The Court also pointed out that delaying the proceedings until a defendant had begun to serve an unlawful subsequent sentence would cause illegal detention of petitioners which could be prevented by prompt judicial action. Id. at 63-64.