Charles L. Patterson, Sr. v. Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT
No.
CR 08-949
Opinion Delivered
CHARLES L. PATTERSON, SR.
Petitioner
v.
LARRY NORRIS, DIRECTOR,
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTION
Respondent
November 6, 2008
PRO SE PETITION FOR WRIT OF
HABEAS CORPUS [CIRCUIT COURT
OF INDEPENDENCE COUNTY, CR 8814, CR 88-18, CR 88-19, CR 88-20, CR
88-21, CR 88-22, CR 88-23, CR 88-24,
CR 88-25]
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
The petitioner, Charles L. Patterson, Sr., brings this petition for writ of habeas corpus
challenging the judgments against him in a number of cases in Independence County Circuit Court.
Petitioner is presently incarcerated in a federal penitentiary in Tucson, Arizona. He asserts that this
court has jurisdiction to hear his petition because the Arkansas Department of Correction has lodged
a detainer with the federal authorities, and he is therefore in custody of the Arkansas Department of
Correction, even though he is not incarcerated in Arkansas.
Although this court may entertain original petitions for writ of habeas corpus, under
Arkansas law, any petition for writ of habeas corpus to effect the release of a prisoner is properly
addressed to the circuit court in the county in which the prisoner is held in custody, unless the
petition is filed pursuant to Act 1780 of 2001. See Lukach v. State, 369 Ark. 475, 255 S.W.3d 832
(2007) (per curiam). Because petitioner is incarcerated outside of this state, an Arkansas court does
not have personal jurisdiction over petitioner to grant the requested relief. A court does not have
jurisdiction to release on a writ of habeas corpus a prisoner not in custody in that court’s jurisdiction.
See Pardue v. State, 338 Ark. 606, 999 S.W.2d 198 (1999) (per curiam) (citing Mackey v. Lockhart,
307 Ark. 321, 819 S.W.2d 702 (1991)). Even if the Arkansas Department of Correction has custody
of petitioner as petitioner asserts, he is not incarcerated in Arkansas at this time and a writ to effect
his release is not properly entertained in Arkansas.
Petition denied.
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
