Curtis v. Ponte

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Curtis v. Ponte

642 A.2d 1171, 1994 R.I. LEXIS 154, 1994 WL 171783

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedApril 29, 1994

DocketNo. 94-180-M.P.

StatusPublished

This text of 642 A.2d 1171 (Curtis v. Ponte) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Curtis v. Ponte, 642 A.2d 1171, 1994 R.I. LEXIS 154, 1994 WL 171783 (R.I. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This matter came before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus wherein the petitioner, who has been transferred from a North Carolina correctional facility to the Donald Wyatt Detention Facility in Central Falls, Rhode Island, seeks release from confinement in this state on the basis of the claimed impropriety of his transfer. We have previously considered a similar petition, David Wilkins v. Joseph Ponte, Director Wyatt Detention Center, 94-40-M.P., wherein we concluded that this court’s jurisdiction may not be expanded so as to determine the propriety of prisoner transfers authorized by the officials of another state. The same principle is applicable here.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.

WEISBERGER, Acting C.J., did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

This matter came before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus wherein the petitioner, who has been transferred from a North Carolina correctional facility to the Donald Wyatt Detention Facility in Central Falls, Rhode Island, seeks release from confinement in this state on the basis of the claimed impropriety of his transfer. We have previously considered a similar petition, David Wilkins v. Joseph Ponte, Director Wyatt Detention Center, 94-40-M.P., wherein we concluded that this court’s jurisdiction may not be expanded so as to determine the propriety of prisoner transfers authorized by the officials of another state. The same principle is applicable here.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.

WEISBERGER, Acting C.J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

642 A.2d 1171, 1994 R.I. LEXIS 154, 1994 WL 171783, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curtis-v-ponte-ri-1994.