Constitutional Law - Due Process - The Punitive Restraints of a Detainer May Not Be Continued When the Requesting State Fails to Hold a Parole Revocation Hearing - Cooper v. Lockhart 489 F.2d 308 (8th Cir. 1973)
Loading...
Authors
Arnold, Janet E.
Issue Date
1974
Volume
7
Issue
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
INTRODUCTION|In Cooper v. Lockhart, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit addressed itself to an important issue in the field of corrections. The case involved an individual incarcerated in the Arkansas State Prison who was wanted for a parole revocation hearing in another jurisdiction. As is customary, the state seeking revocation requested that a detainer be lodged against the inmate by the Arkansas prison authorities. As a result of the detainer, several punitive restrictions (e.g., ineligibility to participate in vocational training, work-release or furlough programs) were also placed upon the prisoner while confined. The issue was whether such punitive consequences could be continued, when the state seeking parole revocation refused to hold a hearing prior to the prisoner's release from Arkansas custody. The court determined that the continuance of the punitive restraints under such circumstances denied the inmate due process protections of the fourteenth amendment. Originally the actions of two inmates, Leroy Cooper and Harry Williams, were consolidated. Cooper was paroled by the State of Missouri in 1970 after he had served part of a five-year sentence. Following parole he was convicted of a felony in Arkansas and incarcerated in that state's prison. On March 16, 1971, a detainer was lodged in favor of Missouri, which had issued a parole violation...
Description
Citation
7 Creighton L. Rev. 575 (1973-1974)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law