Head v. Kearney, Civ. A. No. 2064.
| Decision Date | 20 June 1956 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 2064. |
| Citation | 142 F. Supp. 569 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas |
| Parties | Roy James HEAD, Petitioner, v. Joseph O. KEARNEY, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, Texarkana, Texas, and United States Board of Parole, Washington, D. C., Respondents. |
Roy James Head, pro se.
William M. Steger, U. S. Atty., Harlon E. Martin, Asst. U. S. Atty., Tyler, Tex., for respondents.
On February 25, 1956, the petitioner was convicted in Criminal Action No. 9642 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, on his plea of guilty to transporting in interstate commerce falsely made checks in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 2314 and on that date was sentenced to serve one year in prison. Petitioner is presently detained in the Federal Correctional Institution at Texarkana, Texas, under and by virtue of the judgment and commitment issued in that case. Allowing the maximum statutory good-time off for good behavior the minimum expiration of the sentence imposed in said Criminal Action No. 9642 will be December 26, 1956.
On February 27, 1952, Petitioner in Criminal Action No. 1912 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division, was convicted upon his plea of guilty to three counts of an information of interstate transportation of forged checks in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 2314. In that case a sentence of five years in prison was given on each count with the sentences on the three counts to run concurrently. On October 1, 1955, while petitioner was serving the sentence imposed in the last mentioned case in the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, he was given a conditional release with 514 days remaining unserved on his sentence. On December 12, 1955, the United States Board of Parole issued a retaking warrant for petitioner because petitioner had violated the conditions of his conditional release from the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas. This warrant has not yet been executed, however, the Board of Parole has filed a detainer against petitioner with the Warden of the Federal Correctional Institution at Texarkana, Texas, and under present prison policies and regulations petitioner pursuant to said retaking warrant will be taken into custody upon the date of his release from serving the one year sentence imposed in Criminal Action No. 9642, above referred to.
In his petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus herein petitioner contends that the retaking...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morris v. United States, Civ. A. No. 74-0188-R.
...of the contention two habeas corpus cases are cited: Langston v. Ciccone, 313 F. Supp. 56, 59-60 (W.D.Mo.1970) and Head v. Kearney, 142 F.Supp. 569, 570 (E.D.Tex.1956). Both cases assert as the justification for such a proposition that the United States Board of Parole is domiciled in the D......
-
Battle v. Norton
...the Board. Howell v. Hiatt, 199 F.2d 584, 585 (5th Cir. 1952); Langston v. Ciccone, 313 F.Supp. 56, 60 (W.D.Mo. 1970); Head v. Kearney, 142 F.Supp. 569, 570 (E.D.Tex.1956). However, petitioner has also sued the warden, and one claim of relief seeks immediate release. That claim properly inv......
-
Langston v. Ciccone, Civ. A. No. 18170-3.
...jurisdiction over the Board of Parole in districts outside the District of Columbia. Howell v. Hiatt (C.A.5) 199 F.2d 584; Head v. Kearney (E.D.Tex.) 142 F.Supp. 569. While the federal district courts are granted jurisdiction under Section 1361 of Title 28, U.S.C. "of any action in the natu......