Fortier v. Hobbs
2014 Ark. 209
| Ark. | 2014Background
- Fortier was sentenced to 300 months in ADC to run concurrently with a federal sentence after a 2011 probation violation.
- A December 2011 judgment placed him in ADC custody; he was released to the US Marshal to serve the federal sentence.
- In 2013, Fortier, incarcerated in Lincoln County, filed a pro se habeas petition challenging the Arkansas judgment and custody.
- The Lincoln County Circuit Court denied the habeas petition; Fortier appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court and moved for an extension of time to file his brief.
- The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and held the motion moot, finding no merit to the appeal.
- The court emphasized habeas relief is proper only where there is facial invalidity or lack of trial-court jurisdiction, which Fortier failed to show.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether habeas corpus was proper to challenge the Arkansas judgment | Fortier asserted facial invalidity due to serving ADC sentence. | Habeas jurisdiction requires facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction; none shown. | Habeas petition not meritorious; appeal dismissed. |
| Whether the Arkansas judgment-and-commitment order was facially invalid | Fortier argued the Arkansas judgment was invalid because he was in ADC custody. | The order contemplated ADC service and did not show facial invalidity; removal to federal Penitentiary was not improper relief. | No facial invalidity; writ not appropriate; record supports dismissal. |
| Whether the appeal can proceed from denial of habeas relief | Fortier sought appellate review of habeas denial. | Appeals from habeas denials without merit are not permitted. | Appeal dismissed; motion moot. |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Hobbs, 2014 Ark. 45 (Ark. 2014) (per curiam; meritless habeas appeals)
- Lukach v. State, 369 Ark. 475 (Ark. 2007) (per curiam; meritless postconviction appeals)
- Glaze v. Hobbs, 2013 Ark. 458 (Ark. 2013) (habeas not proper absent facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction)
- Davis v. Reed, 316 Ark. 575 (Ark. 1994) (habeas corpus requires facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction)
- Young v. Norris, 365 Ark. 219 (Ark. 2006) (showing of probable cause required for habeas; burden on petitioner)
- Benton v. Hobbs, 2013 Ark. 385 (Ark. 2013) (habeas relief for improper custody procedures)
- Henderson v. White, 2011 Ark. 361 (Ark. 2011) (per curiam; lack of jurisdiction analysis)
- Bliss v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 315 (Ark. 2012) (jurisdiction and subject-matter considerations in habeas petitions)