Al-Ameen v. Frakes
293 Neb. 248
| Neb. | 2016Background
- Abdul H. Al-Ameen was sentenced as a habitual criminal to a mandatory minimum 10-to-15 year term for possession of a deadly weapon by a felon, with 446 days credit for time served.
- On August 15, 2013, the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services (Department) erroneously discharged Al-Ameen early by applying good-time credit to the 10-year mandatory minimum portion of his sentence.
- Upon discovering the error, the State obtained an arrest and commitment warrant on June 26, 2014; Al-Ameen was returned to custody June 27, 2014, to serve the remaining term.
- Al-Ameen filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the legality of his recommitment; the district court dismissed the petition with prejudice.
- By affidavit in the appellate record, Al-Ameen’s mandatory release date was January 13, 2016, and he was mandatorily discharged before this appeal was decided.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as moot because Al-Ameen was no longer in custody and declined to invoke the public-interest exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of recommitment warrant | Recommitment was void because motions/orders used wrong case number | Warrant was valid to correct erroneous early release | Moot — court did not reach merits because Al-Ameen was discharged |
| Department discretion to discharge | Department’s prior policy and discretion made the unconditional discharge lawful and final | Early discharge was erroneous because good time cannot reduce a mandatory minimum | Moot — court did not decide substance of discretionary/policy claim |
| Waiver by Department | Department’s actions constituted waiver preventing return to custody | No waiver; error justified return to custody to complete mandatory term | Moot — court did not adjudicate waiver claim |
| Due process in warrant procedure | Procedures for obtaining arrest/commitment violated fundamental due process | Procedures were adequate to obtain warrant; arrest lawful | Moot — court declined to address due process claim |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. York, 278 Neb. 306 (discussing habeas corpus scope)
- Greater Omaha Realty Co. v. City of Omaha, 258 Neb. 714 (defining mootness and justiciability principles)
- Caton v. State, 291 Neb. 939 (addressing habeas and mootness considerations)
- Davis v. Settle, 266 Neb. 232 (public-interest exception to mootness)