Zachry v. Hobbs (Per Curiam)
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Arkansas Supreme Court?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Arkansas Supreme Court. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
Appellant filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Jackson County Circuit Court, stating that she was incarcerated at a facility in Jackson County. Appellant was subsequently transferred to a facility in a different county. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that because 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, the Jackson County Circuit Court lacked personal jurisdiction over Petitioner where she was no longer incarcerated in the county where her petition was filed.
Download PDF
Cite as 2013 Ark. 351 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-11-486 Opinion Delivered September CAROLYN DIANNE ZACHRY APPELLANT 26, 2013 APPEAL FROM THE JACKSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 34CV-0999, HON. HAROLD S. ERWIN, JUDGE V. RAY HOBBS, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION APPELLEE APPEAL DISMISSED. PER CURIAM On May 11, 2009, appellant Carolyn Dianne Zachry filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Jackson County Circuit Court. In her petition, appellant states that she is an inmate incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) at a facility in Jackson County. The circuit court denied the petition, and appellant lodged this appeal. We dismiss the appeal because the Jackson 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 Cite as 2013 Ark. 351 of the ADC confirm that appellant is now incarcerated in a facility in Pulaski County. 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 Jackson 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 her 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 her petition was filed because the court can no longer grant the relief sought. Id. Appeal dismissed. J. Brooks Wiggins, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att y Gen., by: Ashley Argo Priest, 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.
