Jones v. Hobbs (Per Curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary

Appellant filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Lincoln County Circuit Court while he was incarcerated at an Arkansas Department of Correction facility in Lincoln County. Appellant was subsequently transferred to a facility in Hot Spring County. The circuit court denied the petition. The Supreme Court dismissed Appellant's appeal for a lack of jurisdiction, holding that, although the Lincoln County Circuit Court may have retained subject-matter jurisdiction over Appellant, it did not retain personal jurisdiction over him where he had subsequently been transferred to a facility in a different county, and thus the court lacked the authority to issue and make a returnable writ.

Download PDF
Cite as 2013 Ark. 433 ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT No. CV-11-1228 Opinion Delivered October MICHAEL E. JONES APPELLANT V. RAY HOBBS, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION APPELLEE 31, 2013 PRO SE APPEAL FROM THE LINCOLN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 40LCV-11-80, HON. JODI RAINES DENNIS, JUDGE APPEAL DISMISSED. PER CURIAM On July 25, 2011, appellant Michael E. Jones filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Lincoln County Circuit Court. At the time that he filed his petition, appellant was an inmate incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) at a facility in Lincoln County. The circuit court denied the petition, and appellant lodged this appeal. We dismiss the appeal because the Lincoln County Circuit Court can no longer grant the relief requested by appellant. An appeal from an order that denied a petition for postconviction relief, including a petition for writ of habeas corpus, will not be permitted to go forward where it is clear that the appellant could not prevail. Wilencewicz v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 230 (per curiam); Fudge v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 80 (per curiam). 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. Wilencewicz, 2012 Ark. 230; Davis v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 167 (per curiam). Appellant s petition was not filed under Act 1780, and the public records of the ADC confirm that appellant is now incarcerated in a facility in Hot Spring County. Cite as 2013 Ark. 433 A circuit court does not have jurisdiction to release on a writ of habeas corpus a prisoner not in custody in that court s jurisdiction. Chestang v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 404 (per curiam); Buckhanna v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 119 (per curiam). When a prisoner who seeks habeas relief is transferred to a facility in a different county, the circuit court in the county where the prisoner was previously incarcerated no longer has jurisdiction to issue and make a returnable writ. Wilencewicz, 2012 Ark. 230. Although the Lincoln County Circuit Court may have retained subject-matter jurisdiction, it does not retain personal jurisdiction over the person in whose custody the prisoner is detained, and an order by that court will not act to effect his release. Id. This court will dismiss an appeal of the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus where the appellant is no longer incarcerated in the county where his petition was filed because the court can no longer grant the relief sought. Id. Appeal dismissed. Michael E. Jones, pro se appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att y Gen., by: Laura Shue, Ass t Att y Gen., for appellee. -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.