Anderson v. Corall
263 U.S. 193 (1923)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Anderson v. Corall, 263 U.S. 193 (1923)

Anderson v. Corall

No. 44

Argued October 4, 1923

Decided November 12, 1923

263 U.S. 193

Syllabus

1. Mere lapse of time, without imprisonment or other restraint contemplated by law, does not constitute service of sentence. P. 263 U. S. 196.

2. Under the Parole Act of June 25, 1910, c. 387, 36 Stat. 819, as amended January 23, 1913, c. 9, 37 Stat. 650, where a federal convict breaks his parole and is retaken under a warden's warrant, the Board of Parole may revoke his parole at any time before his sentence has been fully served and require him to complete his term of imprisonment without deduction for the time spent on parole. P. 263 U. S. 197.

3. With reference to the power of the Board to act as above, time intervening between the issuance of the warden's warrant and its execution, during which the federal convict was incarcerated in a state penitentiary for a state offense, is not to be counted as time served under his federal sentence. P. 263 U. S. 197.

279 F. 822 reversed.

Certiorari to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals which affirmed an order of the district court in habeas corpus discharging the present respondent from imprisonment in the federal penitentiary at Leavenworth.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.