Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

269 F.2d 836

Docket No. 13757.

John M. Johnson v. R. B. Eckle, Superintendent, London Prison Farm

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

June 17, 1959.

2 counsel of record

Relies on Wales v. Whitney · in the Matter of the Application of Ramon Baez · Weber v. Squier

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1959-06-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 1993

5 federal appellate ·

4019591960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

John M. Johnson, in pro. per., for appellant.

William Saxbe and Walter M. Shea, Columbus, Ohio, for appellee.

Before MARTIN, Chief Judge, McALLISTER, Circuit Judge, and CECIL, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

This is an appeal from the order of the District Court dismissing appellant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that it was moot. Appellant had been sentenced to the Ohio Penitentiary on an indeterminate sentence of from one to fifteen years, for the offense of theft. After his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed, and before hearing of the petition, appellant was released from incarceration, on parole. He is not in the custody of appellee, Eckle, Superintendent of the London Prison Farm. With the release of appellant from incarceration and custody, the case became moot.

¶2

Where, after commencement of a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner was released on parole, and was no longer in the custody of the warden, the proceeding is dismissed as moot. United States ex rel. St. John v. Cummings, 2 Cir., 233 F.2d 187. See also Weber v. Squier, 315 U.S. 810, 62 S.Ct. 800, 86 L.Ed. 1209; Ex parte Baez, 177 U.S. 378, 20 S.Ct. 673, 44 L.Ed. 813; Wales v. Whitney, 114 U.S. 564, 5 S.Ct. 1050, 29 L.Ed. 277.

¶3

The order of the District Court is affirmed.

/269/f2d/836 · .json · Public domain