THOMAS J. BULLOCK, III, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, JOE PATTERSON, ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE BOARD OF PAROLE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A state prisoner cannot contest the agreement between sovereigns regarding the order of prosecution and execution of sentences.
A Mississippi convict, serving a federal sentence, challenged the state's right to regain custody upon his release due to a detainer. The convict argu…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interstate Rendition cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This appeal is from a district court order denying the petition of a Mississippi convict for release from a state detainer. We affirm.
Appellant, currently serving a sentence in federal prison for a Dyer Act violation, 18 U.S.C. § 2312, challenges the right of state authorities to regain custody of him upon expiration of the current sentence. At a time when he was under arrest by state officers for car theft and parole violation, he was transferred to federal custody, convicted in federal court, and sentenced to his present term. The State of Mississippi has placed a detainer on him to regain custody upon his release from federal prison. Appellant contends that Mississippi has waived its right to him by handing him over to federal authorities. There is no merit to this contention.
It is well established that where state authorities surrender a prisoner to the federal authorities for trial, sentence, and execution of sentence be fore he is to be returned to state custody, the prisoner has no standing to contest the agreement between the sovereigns as to the order of prosecution and execution of sentences; that is, he may not challenge either his original removal from state custody, or his return thereto after the completion of his federal sentence. See Derengowski v. U. S. Marshal, 8th Cir. 1967, 377 F. 2d 223; Hall v. Looney, 10th Cir. 1958, 256 F. 2d 59; United States ex rel. Moses v. Kipp, 7th Cir. 1956, 232 F. 2d 147; Gunton v. Squier, 9th Cir. 1950, 185 F. 2d 470; United States ex rel. Lombardo v. McDonnell, 7th Cir. 1946, 153 F. 2d 919; Stamphill v. Johnston, 9th Cir. 1943, 136 F. 2d 291, cert. denied, 320 U.S. 766, 64 S.Ct. 70, 88 L.Ed. 457. The State, by giving temporary custody to the federal authorities does so without a complete surrender of its prior jurisdiction over him. Hayward v. Looney, 10th Cir. 1957, 246 F. 2d 56; Zerbst v. McPike, 5th Cir. 1938, 97 F. 2d 253.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sykes v. State OF Cal. (Department OF Motor Vehicles), 497 F.2d 197 (9th Cir. 1974)
-
Causey v. Civiletti, 621 F.2d 691 (5th Cir. 1980)
-
Dorrough v. State OF Tex., 440 F.2d 1063 (5th Cir. 1971)
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Zerbst v. McPIKE, 97 F.2d 253 (5th Cir. 1938)
- Stamphill v. Johnston, 136 F.2d 291 (9th Cir. 1943)
- United States ex rel. Marvin Moses v. Kipp, 232 F.2d 147 (7th Cir. 1956)
- Hayward v. Chesley H. Looney, 246 F.2d 56 (10th Cir. 1957)
- Gunton v. Squier, 185 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1950)
- United States ex rel. Lombardo v. McDONNELL, 153 F.2d 919 (7th Cir. 1946)
- Hall v. Looney, 256 F.2d 59 (10th Cir. 1958)
- Spruill v. Newby, 320 U.S. 766 (U.S. 1943)
- Colley v. Tennessee, 320 U.S. 766 (U.S. 1943)
- Norbert Derengowski v. The U. S. Marshal, 377 F.2d 223 (8th Cir. 1967)