TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

James William Kirby v. United States

James William KIRBY, Appellee, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellant

Kirby v. United States, 600 F.2d 146 (8th Cir. 1979)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
July 16, 1979
Docket
No. 79-1214
Judges
Lay, Ross, Henley
Citations
600 F.2d 146

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

The United States has appealed a decision of the district court requiring the United States Parole Commission to grant petitioner, James William Kirby, a new parole hearing and give consideration to the petitioner’s prior institutional behavior due to petitioner’s sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 4205 (b)(2). Petitioner filed the instant habeas corpus action in May 1978. On August 25, 1978, before issuance of the district court’s order, petitioner escaped from federal custody. Nonetheless, the district court on January 11, 1979, entered its order requiring the Parole Commission to conduct a new parole hearing for Kirby within 60 days of its order.

On appeal the Government informs us that Kirby was arrested by the F.B.I. on an escape warrant on April 10, 1979. The Government urges that the case is not mooted by reason of petitioner’s recapture.

Compare Hicks v. United States Board of Paroles & Pardons, 550 F.2d 401 , 402 n. 3 (8th Cir. 1977)

with Taylor v. Egeler, 575 F.2d 773 (6th Cir. 1978). We do not reach that issue. Even if we were to approve the district court’s opinion requiring the Parole Commission to grant petitioner a new hearing, it is obvious the fact of petitioner’s escape would enter into the Commission’s consideration. In view of this new development of the case, i. e., the fact of Kirby’s escape, we vacate the district court’s order. Petitioner should seek any further relief directly from the Parole Commission.

The order is vacated.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1980: 11982: 11984: 219802026peak 1984 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Douglas Charles Dufresne v. Benjamin Baer, Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission744 F.2d 1543 (11th Cir. 1984)
  2. Albert E. Paschal v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc.738 F.2d 1173 (11th Cir. 1984)
  3. Joost v. United States Parole Commission535 F. Supp. 71 (D. Kan. 1982)
  4. Hayward v. U. S. Parole Commission502 F. Supp. 1007 (D. Minnesota 1980)

Most recent

  1. Douglas Charles Dufresne v. Benjamin Baer, Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission744 F.2d 1543 (11th Cir. 1984)
  2. Albert E. Paschal v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc.738 F.2d 1173 (11th Cir. 1984)
  3. Joost v. United States Parole Commission535 F. Supp. 71 (D. Kan. 1982)
  4. Hayward v. U. S. Parole Commission502 F. Supp. 1007 (D. Minnesota 1980)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Hicks v. United States Bd. of Paroles & Pardons, 550 F.2d 401 (8th Cir. 1977) 14
Taylor v. Egeler, 575 F.2d 773 (6th Cir. 1978) 7

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list