Jasper Marshall Clayton v. William J. Stone

358 F.2d 548, 123 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6862
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedMarch 16, 1966
Docket19933
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 358 F.2d 548 (Jasper Marshall Clayton v. William J. Stone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jasper Marshall Clayton v. William J. Stone, 358 F.2d 548, 123 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6862 (D.C. Cir. 1966).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of appellant’s “suggestion of mootness”, it is

Ordered by the court that this appeal is dismissed.

Separate Statement of Chief Judge Bazelon

BAZELON, Chief Judge.

In this petition for writ of habeas corpus, Jasper Clayton, age 15 alleges that 1) he is detained in the Receiving Home for Children without any finding of probable cause that he committed a law violation, 2) the Juvenile Court failed to inquire into available alternatives to detention in the Receiving Home pending trial on the law violation charge, and 3) the Receiving Home is an unsuitable place of detention. The District Court, after a hearing, dismissed the petition and petitioner appealed.

Following oral argument in this Court, the Juvenile Court released petitioner in the custody of his maternal grandmother in South Carolina. Since the detention from which petitioner sought release no longer exists, I agree that the serious issues raised by his petition are now moot.

*549 An appeal from the denial of a petition raising substantially the same issues was similarly mooted while pending in this court. See Elmore v. Stone, D.C.Cir., 355 F.2d 841, Order of January 7, 1966. If a substantial and recurring issue is repeatedly mooted before it can be adjudicated, a federal court is not without power to decide the issue in an appropriate case. See Southern Pac. Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 498, 515, 31 S.Ct. 279, 55 L.Ed. 310 (1911). See also Diamond, Federal Jurisdiction to Decide Moot Cases, 94 U.Pa.L.Rev. 125, 135-37 (1946).

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

Related

Roberts v. State
445 P.2d 674 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1968)
In Re GAULT
387 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
358 F.2d 548, 123 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jasper-marshall-clayton-v-william-j-stone-cadc-1966.