587 F.2d 783 - Powers v. Schwartz — 587 F.2d 783

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 1991

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

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.

¶1Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Janet Reno, State’s Atty., Paul M. Rashkind, Stephen V. Rosin, Asst. State’s Attys., Miami, Fla., Charles A. Stampelos, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for respondents-appellants.

¶2Sheldon “Skip” Taylor, Miami, Fla., for petitioner-appellee.

¶3Before THORNBERRY, AINSWORTH and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM:

¶5Appellee Powers seeks habeas corpus relief from her detention by appellants. She claims that Florida’s method of determining whether to grant pretrial bail to persons accused of crimes punishable by life imprisonment is unconstitutional. The district court agreed with appellee’s claims and granted her bail. 448 F.Supp. 54 (S.D.Fla.1978).

¶6At oral argument, all parties admitted that since the district court’s action, Ms. Powers has been tried on and convicted of the charges that precipitated this action. Ms. Powers is therefore no longer a pretrial *784detainee; she has not shown a reasonable probability that she will again acquire that status in the future; and this is not a class action. The case is therefore moot. Wein-stein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 96 S.Ct. 347, 46 L.Ed.2d 350 (1975).

¶7Because this is not a class action, such as Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 95 S.Ct. 854, 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975), it is irrelevant that other defendants may suffer the deprivation about which appellee complains. Weinstein, supra. This court’s inability to consider moot claims is based on the fundamental Article III requirement that the particular parties before the court have “such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends for illumination of difficult constitutional questions.” Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 204, 82 S.Ct. 691, 703, 7 L.Ed.2d 663 (1962). Because Ms. Powers no longer has the requisite personal interest, this court cannot consider her claims.

¶8Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is VACATED and the case REMANDED to that court with instructions to dismiss the complaint.