Pitts v. State

Cite as 2013 Ark. 454
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CR-13-507
Opinion Delivered November 7, 2013
KENNETH RAY PITTS PRO SE MOTION TO FILE A
APPELLANT BELATED APPEAL, TO QUASH
SUBPOENA, AND TO REPLY TO
v. NOTICE OF APPEAL; MOTION TO
QUASH SUBPOENA AND FOR
STATE OF ARKANSAS TRANSCRIPT TO BE RELEASED;
APPELLEE MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL; MOTION FOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
AND FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL; SECOND MOTION FOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
AND FOR APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL; MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
BRIEF; PETITION FOR LEAVE TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS;
SECOND MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
BRIEF AND MOTION TO FILE A
BELATED BRIEF [PULASKI
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 60CR-
05-4343, HON. TIMOTHY DAVIS
FOX, JUDGE]
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS
MOOT.
PER CURIAM
On August 25, 2009, appellant Kenneth Ray Pitts filed a pro se petition for writ of
habeas corpus in the Pulaski County Circuit Court. In his petition, appellant stated that he
was an inmate incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) at a facility in
Cite as 2013 Ark. 454
Lincoln County. Appellant subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the habeas petition and
then filed a second petition for habeas corpus on July 19, 2010, in which he again stated that
he was an inmate incarcerated in the ADC at a facility in Lincoln County. Thereafter,
appellant filed a series of motions and pleadings in the case. The circuit court granted
appellant’s motion to dismiss the first habeas petition and denied the second habeas petition,
and it denied or dismissed motions and pleadings filed in the habeas proceeding. Appellant
lodged this appeal. Now before us are appellant’s motions filed in this court.
We dismiss the appeal because the Pulaski County Circuit Court could not grant the
relief requested by appellant. An appeal from an order that denied a petition for
postconviction relief, including a petition for writ of habeas corpus, will not be permitted to
go forward where it is clear that the appellant could not prevail. Wilencewicz v. Hobbs, 2012
Ark. 230 (per curiam); Fudge v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 80 (per curiam).
Any petition for writ of habeas corpus to effect the release of a prisoner is properly
addressed to the circuit court in the county in which the prisoner is held in custody, unless
the petition is filed pursuant to Act 1780 of 2001. Wilencewicz, 2012 Ark. 230; Davis v. Hobbs,
2012 Ark. 167 (per curiam). Appellant’s petition was not filed under Act 1780. Further,
appellant alleged that he was incarcerated in a facility in Lincoln County at the time that he
filed his petitions, and the public records of the ADC confirm that appellant is now
incarcerated in a facility in Jefferson County.
A circuit court does not have jurisdiction to release on a writ of habeas corpus a
prisoner not in custody in that court’s jurisdiction. Chestang v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 404 (per
2
Cite as 2013 Ark. 454
curiam); Buckhanna v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 119 (per curiam). Appellant is not incarcerated in
Pulaski County; thus, Pulaski County does not have jurisdiction, and an order by that court
will not act to effect his release.1
Appeal dismissed; motions moot.
Kenneth Ray Pitts, pro se appellant.
No response.
1
In the motions and pleadings filed in this case, appellant seeks some relief that may be
outside of a habeas proceeding. Nevertheless, the motions and pleadings were filed as part of
the habeas proceeding; thus, they are subject to the jurisdictional requirements of that
proceeding.
3