Jones, Ary v. Enger, Troy
3:19-cv-00938
| W.D. Wis. | Aug 10, 2020Background
- Petitioner Ary Jones filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his parole revocation in Dane County Case No. 02-CF-3006.
- The court screened the petition on June 3, 2020 and ordered Jones to submit additional information by June 26, 2020; he did not file the requested material.
- Jones telephoned the Clerk on July 16 asking for more time but never submitted a written extension request or the information ordered.
- After filing, Jones was released from custody on extended supervision; the court amended the caption to reflect his current custodian.
- The court recognized that Jones’s release raises a mootness issue: parole-revocation habeas claims become moot upon release unless collateral consequences remain.
- The court granted Jones until August 31, 2020 to show a concrete and continuing injury attributable to the parole revocation; absent such a showing, the petition will be dismissed with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mootness after release | Jones challenges the parole revocation and seeks relief; implicit claim that injury remains | Release ends custody so habeas relief may no longer provide benefit absent collateral consequences | Court: Release likely renders the petition moot unless Jones shows a "concrete and continuing injury;" gave deadline to show such injury |
| Failure to comply with court order | Jones called for more time but did not file a written extension or the ordered information | Noncompliance could support dismissal for failure to prosecute or to follow court orders | Court: permitted an additional deadline (Aug 31, 2020) to show continuing injury; stated Jones need not comply with the June 3 screening order before that deadline |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472 (1990) (Article III requires an actual case or controversy)
- Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40 (1968) (criminal convictions commonly carry collateral consequences)
- Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1 (1998) (parole revocation claims are moot after release unless collateral consequences persist)
- Lane v. Williams, 455 U.S. 624 (1982) (parole expiration can render habeas claims moot)