Jones v. Cunningham
371 U.S. 236 (1963)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236 (1963)

Jones v. Cunningham

No. 77

Argued December 3, 1962

Decided January 14, 1963

371 U.S. 236

Syllabus

1. A state prisoner who has been placed on parole, under the "custody and control" of a parole board, is "in custody" within the meaning of 28 U.S. C. § 2241, and, on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a Federal District Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine his charge that his state sentence was imposed in violation of the Federal Constitution. Pp. 371 U. S. 236-243.

2. The fact that such a petitioner has left the territorial jurisdiction of the District Court does not deprive that Court of jurisdiction when the members of the parole board are still within its jurisdiction and can be required to do all things necessary to bring the case to a final adjudication. Pp. 371 U. S. 243-244.

294 F.2d 608 reversed.

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.