Kelsey v. State Ex Rel. McManus

244 N.W.2d 53, 309 Minn. 560, 1976 Minn. LEXIS 1586
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJuly 2, 1976
Docket46313
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 244 N.W.2d 53 (Kelsey v. State Ex Rel. McManus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kelsey v. State Ex Rel. McManus, 244 N.W.2d 53, 309 Minn. 560, 1976 Minn. LEXIS 1586 (Mich. 1976).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is a pro se appeal from an order of the district court denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus without a hearing. We affirm.

Petitioner, an inmate at the state prison, 1 seeks release from confinement on the ground that the Minnesota Corrections Authority violated his rights when they refused him access to his prison base file prior to the hearing which resulted in denial of his parole application. Petitioner sought access to the file so that at the hearing he could challenge any adverse information contained in it on which the parole authorities might rely.

We agree with the district court that habeas corpus was not a proper remedy in this case. It is true that petitioner sought immediate release from prison and that habeas corpus is an appropriate remedy if the relief to which the petitioner may be entitled is immediate release. See, Preiser v. Rodriquez, 411 U. S. 475, 93 S. Ct. 1827, 36 L. ed. 2d 439 (1973). However, even if the authorities erred in denying petitioner access to his file, petitioner still would not be entitled to immediate release. Rather, at most he would be entitled to obtain a copy of the file and have an immediate rehearing before the parole board, at which time *561 the board would exercise anew its discretion in determining whether to grant petitioner parole. Therefore, the district court properly denied the writ without a hearing.

This court’s recent decision in County of Sherburne v. Schoen, 306 Minn. 171, 236 N. W. 2d 592 (1975), sets forth the appropriate procedures to be followed by petitioner in obtaining the information he desires.

Affirmed.

1

Petitioner is serving a sentence for attempted first-degree murder. See, State v. Kelsey, 293 Minn. 397, 196 N. W. 2d 287 (1972).

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

Related

Rivers, Richard Anthony
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2022
Rud v. Fabian
743 N.W.2d 295 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2007)
Loyd v. Fabian
682 N.W.2d 688 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2004)
State ex rel. Linehan v. Wood
394 N.W.2d 152 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1986)
Kelsey v. State
283 N.W.2d 892 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
244 N.W.2d 53, 309 Minn. 560, 1976 Minn. LEXIS 1586, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelsey-v-state-ex-rel-mcmanus-minn-1976.