Document: 410 U.S. 484 93 S.Ct. 1123 35 L.Ed.2d 443 Charles D. BRADEN, Petitioner,v.30TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF KENTUCKY. No. 71—6516. Argued Dec. 5, 1972. Decided Feb. 28, 1973. Syllabus Petitioner, imprisoned in Alabama, applied to the District Court for Western of Kentucky a writ federal habeas corpus compel Commonwealth grant him speedy trial on an indictment returned by grand jury respondent court regarding which had lodged detainer with Alabma. The granted writ, but Appeals reversed ground that 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a), provides '(w)rits may be . district courts within their respective jurisdictions' precluded granting prisoner who was not physically present territorial limits court. Held: 1. Under Peyton v. Rowe, 391 54, 88 1549, 20 426 discarded 'prematurity doctrine' McNally Hill, 293 131, 55 24, 79 L.Ed. 238, petitioner 'in custody' meaning 2241(c)(3) purposes attack underlying detainer, even though he confined Alabama prison. Pp. 448—489. 2. exhaustion doctrine Ex parte Royall, 117 241, 66 734, 29 868, does bar petition alleging, under Smith Hooey, 393 374, 89 575, 21 607, constitutional claim denial trial, has yet been brought state charge. must, however, have exhausted available remedies consideration claim. 489—493. 3. jurisdiction considering requires only issuing over custodian prisoner. 494—495. 4. Ahrens Clark, 335 188, 68 1443, 92 1898, relies, can no longer viewed as requiring petitions petitioner's confinement. Here, since properly served process Kentucky, erred concluding should dismissed lack jurisdiction. 495—501. 454 F.2d 145, and remanded. David R. Hood, Detroit, Mich., petitioner. John M. Famularo, Lexington, Ky., respondent, pro hac vice, special leave Court. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion 1 Petitioner is presently serving sentence He corpus, alleging his right 607 (1969), praying order issue directing afford immediate then three-year-old indictment. We are consider whether, provision 2241(a) (emphasis supplied), from entertaining application. held section did its determination further denied ordered either secure presence 60 days or dismiss Sixth Circuit 'the conferred 'limited filed persons Court." 146 (1972). certiorari. 407 909, 2451, 32 682 reverse. 2 * On July 31, 1967, Jefferson County (30th Judicial Kentucky) indicted one count storehouse breaking safebreaking. At time indictment, custody California, stand But November 13, escaped officials remained at large until arrest February 1968. convicted certain unspecified felonies courts, sentenced prison, where when this action. 3 validity conviction here, just it before Kentucky. Nor challenge 'present effect being given (Kentucky) (Alabama) authorities ..' Nelson George, 399 224, 225, 90 1963, 1964, 26 578 (1970). attacks, rather, underlies against State. 4 In se application relief Federal alleged made repeated demands delay would impair ability defend himself, existence adversely affected condition confinement prejudicing opportunity parole. response show cause, argued lacked because district. Respondent added 'petitioner case legality any adverse effects Court.' App. 6—7. held, citing must 'attempt return foreign pending charges such so .. Since State take action, follows rests necessary officials.' 9. 5 constraint earlier decision,1 stated 'reach(ed) conclusion reluctantly' possibility decision 'result Braden's inability find forum assert trial—a legally entitled (1968). This rule Fifth Circuit, (Braden) incarcerated, appears proper file petition. See May Georgia, 409 203 (5th Cir. 1969). also Rodgers Louisiana, 418 237 Braden thus himself ensnared what aptly termed 'Catch 2254'—unable vindicate rights two states could possibly remedy. Tuttle, Catch 2254: Jurisdiction Interstate Detainers, U.PittL.Rev. 489, 502—03 (1971).' F.2d, 146—147. II 6 certiorari resolve sharp conflict among courts2 choice attacks interstate corpus. Before turning question, we make clear raise time. First, currently statute, 2241(c)(3). Prior our (1968), 238 (1934), would, course, barred relief.3 Rowe prematurity doctrine, permitted current confinement, imposed future, opened door action.4 7 Second, all prelude It true, tried defense when, if, finally trial. Brother REHNQUIST points out dissent, lie, absent 'special circumstances,' adjudicate merits affirmative criminal charge prior judgment 253, 741, 868 (1886). not, seek litigate charge, demand enforcement Commonwealth's obligation bring promptly (1969). offering those these circumstances claim, 8 judicially crafted instrument reflects careful balance between important interests federalism need preserve 'swift imperative remedy cases illegal restraint confinement.' Secretary Home Affairs O'Brien, (1923) A.C. 603, 609 (H.L.). cannot used blunderbuss shatter attempt litigation claims without regard underlie called into existence. As decisions, 9 'preserves role law. Early intervention proceedings tend remove questions isolate issues, thereby understanding hospitality federally protected interests. (the doctrine) preserves orderly administration judicial business, preventing interruption adjudication proceedings. petitioners reach appellate bevelop correct errors law most effectively supervise impose uniformity courts.' Note, Developments Law—Federal Habeas Corpus, 83 Harv.L.Rev. 1038, 1094 10 Darr Burford, 339 200, 204—206, 70 587, 590 591, 94 761 (1950), overruled it, Fay Noia, 372 391, 417—420, 822, 837—838, 837 (1963). supra, U.S., 251—252, S.Ct., 740—471; Hawk, 321 114, 64 448, 572 (1944); cf. Younger Harris, 401 37, 91 746, 27 669 (1971); Stefanelli Minard, 342 117, 72 118, 96 138 (1951). 11 fundamental fully satisfied situation. already presented rejected apparently once obligated incur risk another escape returning opportunities establish position obviate duty supra. Moreover, effort abort proceeding disrupt functioning processes. comes court, forestall prosecution, enforce provide forum. delayed conclusively determined prosecution temporarily moribund. began second 10-year sentences March 1972, revival late 1982. A action jeopardize legitimate interest federalism.5 shares view specifically concedes remedies, Tr. Oral Arg. 41. 12 us, held—not surprisingly, considerations discussed above—that chosen wrong forum, 'which (1968).' 146. And Court, upheld necessarily adopted view. Indeed, great majority lower considered question reached same, indisputably correct, conclusion.6 13 emphasize nothing said permit derailment defenses prematurely contention dissent converts fedral 'a pretrial-motion prisoners,' wholly misapprehends today's holding. III 14 Accordingly, turn brought. terms traditional venue considerations, almost surely desirable claim.7 material events took place, records witnesses pertinent likely found. presumably less convenient than expense transporting hearing prove necessary, likelihood outweighed difficulties confined.8 makes 'on balance, appear simpler expensive (as involved case) own districts.' Brief 6. 15 insists however convenience might struck reference venue, rigidly jurisdictionally controlled Supreme justice thereof, circuit judge jurisdictions.' supplied). Relying 1898 (1948), contends—and held—that italicized words limit Court's seeking interpretation compelled language statute Ahrens, fundamentally odds statutory scheme, agree. 16 act upon seeks relief, person holds unlawful custody. Wales Whitney, 114 564, 574, 1050, 1054—1055, 277 (1885). classic statement: 17 'The fact observed mode procedure is, directed to, upon, confined, jailer. former except through latter. officer serves unbar prison doors, set free, relieves compelling oppressor release constraint. whole force spent respondent.' Matter Jackson, Mich. 417, 439—440 (1867), quoted approval Endo, 323 283, 306, 65 208, 220, 243 (1944). 196—197, 1447. (Rutledge, J., dissenting). 18 Read literally, more custodian. So long service process, 'within jurisdiction' released outright custody, if outside court's 19 Nevertheless, there indicating prisoner's confines invariable prerequisite exercise 120 German nationals Ellis Island, New York, deportation sought principal removal orders exceeded President's authority Alien Enemy Act 1789. They Columbia, naming Attorney General United States. Construing predecessor phrase, jurisdictions,' Columbia inquiring prisoners' detention therefore affirmed dismissal jurisdictional grounds. Our rested Congress' paramount concern attendant 'production prisoners remote sections, perhaps thousands miles issued writ. afforded travel, cost transportation, administrative burden undertaking negate purpose.' 191, 1444. found support assumption legislative history Act.9 During course Senate debate 1867,10 bill criticized Florida some men imprisonment Vermont States.' Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 2d Sess., 730. Senator Trumbull, sponsor bill, met objection amendment adding words, circumscription power writ.11 developments profound impact continuing vitality decision. overruling ordinary Congress indicated number premises were thought require untenable. 1950 collateral sentencing rather confined. 2255. Similarly, contesting contains districts, other located, option located. 2241(d).12 enacting amendments, explicitly recognized substantial advantages having resolved originally located nearest site controversy.13 challenged theoretical underpinnings codifying sanctioned Walker Johnston, 312 275, 284, 61 578, 85 830 (1941), whereby many instances adjudicates 2243. States Hayman, 205, 222—223, 263, 273—274, 232 (1952).14 22 too, undercut Where American citizens overseas (and territory court) implicitly, petitioners' absence obstacle Burns Wilson, 346 137, 73 1045, 97 1508 (1953), rehearing denied, 844, 851—852, 74 3, 7—8, 98 363 (opinion Frankfurter, J.); ex rel. Toth Quarles, 350 11, 76 1, 100 (1955); Hirota Army MacArthur, 338 197, 199, 69 1238, 1902 (1948) (Douglas, concurring (1949)). 23 further, critical development emergence new classes able adoption expansive definition 'custody' requirement statute. (1968); Carafas LaVallee, 234, 1556, 554 Jones Cunningham, 371 236, 373, 285 possible they brgun serve. enabled case, holding acts agent demanding State,15 indifferent resolution detainer. example, dispute Alabama. serve useful purpose apply fact, slavish jar very addition assume intended distant preclude familiar laws practices Kentucky.16 Meadows 1176, 1181 (C.A.2, 1970); Word North Carolina, 406 352 (C.A.4, IV 24 establishing inflexible rule, dictating inconvenient class foreseen decision.17 Of will claims. facts itself, bringing Eastern York them No reason apparent why Government undertaken detainees Columbia. circumstances, principles mandated Clark stands broader proposition. 25 deprive jurisdiction, district, see Strait Laird, 341, 1693, 141 (1972); Schlanger Seamans, 487, 995, 251 (1971), below ordering remanded consistent opinion. Reversed BLACKMUN, result. I concur reaches unexpected notes extraordinary expansion concept effected recent years. Hull, 546, 640, 1034 (1941); (1963); Cf. (1971). trend kind, begun, easily assumes startling proportions. step, warden now do go far say result wrong. merely point come way notions Great Writ. common-law scholars past hardly recognize developed, W. Blackstone, Commentaries 131 134, suspect, conclude better. 30 irony. after State, expense, California Had escaped, taken place five years ago. Furthermore, free there. strong increases strength goes by. 31 REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE POWELL concur, dissenting. Today overrules construed intent lineal 2241. Although 'convenience' are, context, appropriate Congress, make. legislatively subsequent 'developments' simply irrelevant task ascertaining providing, 1867, writs authorities. accomplishes feat prestidigitation but, discussion analysis, extends scope implicitly rejects 33 appreciate full decision, brief reiteration procedural stance necessary. incarcerated pursuant judgment, attack. conducted petitioner; obtained. From requested ask deliver request, refused mandamus request instant contending collaterally substance, seeking, otherwise raised absolute 34 first inquiry whether can, petitioning reasons 'discarded doctrine,' ante, 488, corpus.' §§ 2241, 2254. Section 2254 pertains court; context trap 'ensnare' petitioner, felt existed. here warranted 2241(c)(3); empowers inter alia, rendered proceeding. analyzed. 36 Fourteenth Amendments, 'make diligent, good-faith bring' id., 383, 579, and, therefore, another. agree reasoning. 37 Smith, try That involve came dismissed. Texas ruled produced reversed, that, Amendment guarantees therefor, obtain sovereignty 38 means follows, flaw reasoning 'right' affirmatively right, vindicated Hooey distinct totally rely justification attempting defendant expeditiously possible. like rights, which, unlike others, potential benefit accused passage Barker Wingo, 514, 2182, 101 sovereign fails, demand, weigh heavily defendant's favor. imply may, effect, injunction conduct If fails perform duty, face consequences obtaining conviction, Wingo. leads failure prospective advance strongly approach established 39 allowing resort attacking 'future custody.' relies justify Peyton, significantly different posture case. There, begun valid sentence, run consecutively sentence. Even 2241(c) (3), 2254, entered similarly conducted. suggestion 'future,' unwarrantedly both convict, supported Peyton. Chief Warren, writing emphasized 'substantially post-conviction device,' 60, 1552, resolving issues adequately developed original proceedings.' Id., 63, 1554. demise allow defective convictions.' 65, 1555. 40 glosses disparate asserts, analyzing historical function prisoners, rationale applicable pretrial, preconviction Citation obscure significant departure previous certainly analysis detailed puts forth. 41 There doubt assert, motion handed down, What disregards, century decisions truly circumstances. 42 selling bond coupon license. petitioned predicated violated contract clause, insofar owners coupons. (then) exercised discretion so, wrote: 43 'That light relations existing, system government, tribunals Union states, recognition public good disturbed unnecessary equally bound guard protect secured constitution.' 251, 740. 44 forth Royall—that interfere violation Constitution consistently followed. Cook Hart, 183, 40, 934 (1892) (custody violate Art. 4, 2); Eno, 155 89, 30, 80 (1894) Supremacy Clause); Whitten Tomlinson, 160 231, 297, (1895) due improper extradition); Drury Lewis, 200 229, 50 343 (1906) Clause). Fonda, 516, 848, 994 (1886); re Duncan, 139 449, 573, 219 (1891); Wood, 140 278, 738, 505 Frederich, 149 70, 793, 653 (1893). situations pretrial interference processes justified Clause, Wildenhus's Case, 385, 565 (1887); Loney, 134 372, 584, 949 (1890); Neagle, 135 658, (1890). 45 ruling determine actuality sometime indefinite future constitutes unjustifiable administation State's laws. use presumably, limited neither situation nor Amendments. same alleges plans introduce confession allegedly obtained evidence Fourth thoroughly disagree conversion prisoners. 46 sanctioning administration, expands parameters intervene. detained (a) filing 189, 1443. phrase mean 193, 1445. 47 says 'language' 'indicates' below. explicit plainly much 'indication.' 48 'Thus restricted policy, enactment. feel policy advanced giving this. imported so.' 192—193, 1445 added; footnote omitted). 49 today sound 1444; 228 n. 1966, ascertain Having completed amend misinterpreted congressional suggest desirability, viewpoint, alterations Cleveland States, 329 14, 67 (1946). noted dilemma 'caused' appropriately Congress. 1966. Legislative 'inaction' amending comport evaluation '(s)ound administration' warrants disingenuous reading achieve despite prodding, mandate. However impatient sometimes fail every situation, inappropriate lists several somehow validity, opinion, jurisdicitions.' amended 2255 relevant 2241(d) applies intrastate relevance amendments respect little obscure. incompatible statutes dealing involving transportation argument 'undermines' overlooks reserved 192 1445, rejection Ahrens. Finally, expanded notion supports, compels, construction unrelated phrase. 51 final provisions unamended changed previously ascertained intent. construction, justifies much, more, force, below: aware deliberately chose selectively indications H.R.Rep.No.1894, 89th 1—2 (1966); S.Rep.No.1502, Sess. (1966), U.S.Code & Admin.News (1966) p. 2968. 497. 52 adhere during legislation section, various factors weighs itself. White Tennessee, 447 1354 (CA6 1971). Compare 1176 (CA2 1970), (CA4 1969) (proper State), Van Scoten Pennsylvania, 404 767 (CA3 1968); Ashley Washington, 394 125 (CA9 1968), Booker Arkansas, 380 240 (CA8 1967) confinement). generally 1087—1093 similar effort' 579. arose direct review occasion Yet logically opposed warrant prompt context. 63—64, 1554—1555. 1179; 353—355. difficulty decide him, sufficiently Baker Grice, 169 323, 748 (1898), failed exhaust remedies. rejecting each grounds relied intervention, stated: 'It Hathaway (Grice) come, about expiring, again, allegation proof part made. simple call trial; meantime bail, making evincing desire, had. 'We refusal bail furnish foundation questions, shown. mere omission move party bail) up, coupled assertion eager anxious showing whatever render anxiety eagerness known authorities.' 292 293, 326—327. Young Ragen, 337 235, 238—239, 1073, 1074—1075, 1333 (1949); Marino 332 561, 563—570, 240, 241—245, 170 (1947) concurring). Chauncey Second 453 389, 390 1971); Beck 442 1037 (CA5 Kane Virginia, 419 1369 1969); Coleman, 341 F.Supp. 272, 274 (WD Ky.1971) (dictum); Pitts Rundle, 325 480 (ED Pa.1971) Williams 315 1261 (WD. Mo.1970) Varallo Ohio, Tex.1970) Campbell 308 796 (SD Ga. Piper 306 1259 (Conn.1969) Hocker, 485 (Nev. Lawrence Blackwell, 298 708 (ND Carnage Sanborn, 304 857 Kirk Oklahoma, 300 Okl. (alternative holding). (1952), discussing 2255; 2968, 2241(d); Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure 3; Bar Association Project Standards Criminal Justice, Remedies 1.4, (approved draft 1161 S.Rep.No.1526, 80th (1948). Fairman, Some Problems Following Flag, Stan.L.Rev. 633—640 (1949). Stat. 385. passed, provided: justices judges jurisdictions shall 2968 (legislative 2241(d)); (1952) (discussing 2255). motivated solely desire insure disputes avoid vastly disproportionate handling fallen, districts numbers 1189—1191 Nothing concurrent above, brings transfer suit 1404(a). Hoffman Blaski, 335, 1084, 1254 (1960). Obviously, 1968 choice-offorum recently draw inference overrule type us. (1970), adverted on, precise here. out, 'obvious, logical, practical solution 2241 shortcoming become following Rowe. Sound calls amendment.' note drafted Administrative Conference Courts introduced 92d it.

Category: 0