JOHNSON

v.

WARDEN, EASTERN STATE PENITENTIARY; FORESTIER V. UNITED STATES; PATTERSON V. TINSLEY, WARDEN; AND HOWLERY V. RANDOLPH, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By

• Emil R. Yates v. Looney, 250 F.2d 956 (10th Cir. 1958)
  …r to revoke the conditional release and require Yates to complete the service of his sentence, regardless of the premature release. Pulliam v. Looney, 10 Cir., 224 F. 2d 913, certiorari denied Pulliam v. U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, 350 U.S. 909, 76 S.Ct. 207, 100 L.Ed. 798. We do not hold that there are not circumstances where a sentence would continue to run after an erroneous release, but this case is not within that category. See White v. Pearlman, 10 Cir., 42 F. 2d 788. The judgment i…
• Miller v. Taylor, 290 F.2d 8 (10th Cir. 1961)
  …the statute due to erroneous application of a statutory formula, or other mistake, does not affect the jurisdiction of the Board to revoke the conditional release. Yates v. Looney, supra; Pulliam v. Looney, 10 Cir., 224 F. 2d 913, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 909, 76 S.Ct. 207, 100 L.Ed. 798. See Taylor v. Daniels, 10 Cir., 284 F. 2d 135. Affirmed.…
• Elry A. Welch v. Taylor, 292 F.2d 481 (10th Cir. 1961)
  …ion of the statutory formula for earned good time, this in no way affects the jurisdiction of the Board of Parole to revoke the conditional release. Miller v. Taylor, 10 Cir., 290 F. 2d 8; Pulliam v. Looney, 10 Cir., 224 F. 2d 913, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 909, 76 S.Ct. 207, 100 L.Ed. 798. The imprisonment contemplated by federal court sentences is confinement in fact, and until the maximum sentence is served, either by actual confinement or on conditional release, the prisoner remains subject to the ter…