Tyson v. State, 2014 Ark. 421

In 2011, Tyson was convicted in Little River County Circuit Court of manufacture of marijuana, simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms, possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (methamphetamine), and possession of drug paraphernalia, receiving an aggregate 192-month sentence.
No appeal was taken from that judgment.
In 2013, while incarcerated, Tyson filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Hot Spring County Circuit Court.
The State moved to dismiss the petition, and the circuit court dismissed on the ground that Tyson failed to state a cognizable habeas claim.
Tyson appeals the circuit court’s dismissal.
The Supreme Court dismisses the appeal, holding the Hot Spring County court could not grant the requested relief because Tyson was no longer in custody in that county, and the court lacks personal jurisdiction over him; it clarifies proper venue and jurisdiction rules for habeas petitions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Can the appeal proceed when petitioner is no longer in custody in the filing county?	Tyson argues for appellate review of habeas denial.	State contends no relief is possible and appeal is moot.	Appeal dismissed; no relief available.
Where may a habeas petition properly be filed and heard?	Tyson filed in Hot Spring County, contending jurisdiction.	State argues proper venue/jurisdiction issues apply; custody determines proper forum.	Petition must be in the county of custody; transfer of custody waives jurisdiction; dismissal proper.

Wilencewicz v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 230 (Ark. 2012) (per curiam on habeas appeal jurisdiction)
Fudge v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 80 (Ark. 2012) (per curiam; habeas jurisdiction considerations)
Borum v. State, 2011 Ark. 415 (Ark. 2011) (per curiam; procedural habeas requirements)
Chestang v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 404 (Ark. 2011) (per curiam; custody/jurisdiction issue)
Buckhanna v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 119 (Ark. 2011) (per curiam; lack of jurisdiction when transferred)