William Sullivan v. William Stephens, Director

582 F. App'x 375
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 17, 2014
Docket13-10870
StatusUnpublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 582 F. App'x 375 (William Sullivan v. William Stephens, Director) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
William Sullivan v. William Stephens, Director, 582 F. App'x 375 (5th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

William Mark Sullivan, formerly Texas prisoner # 1849693, appeals from the order dismissing his habeas corpus application under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Sullivan challenges one of his two 2000 convictions of aggravated sexual assault, state court case no. 10,805. He discharged that sentence in 2003. He was convicted in 2013 of failure to register as a sex offender. He discharged his sentence for failure to register on April 5, 2014, while this appeal was pending.

“This Court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). “Under Article III of the Constitution, federal courts may adjudicate only actual, ongoing cases or controversies.” Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477, 110 S.Ct. 1249, 108 L.Ed.2d 400 (1990). Sullivan is no longer incarcerated on either the 2000 sentence or the 2013 sentence. His obligation to register as a sex offender does not render him “in custody” for purposes of a § 2254 challenge. See Calhoun v. Att’y Gen., 745 F.3d 1070, 1074 (10th Cir.2014); Wilson v. Flaherty, 689 F.3d 332, 336-38 (4th Cir. 2012); Virsnieks v. Smith, 521 F.3d 707, 717-20 (7th Cir.2008); Leslie v. Randle, 296 F.3d 518, 521-23 (6th Cir.2002); Henry v. Lungren, 164 F.3d 1240, 1242 (9th Cir.1999); Willliamson v. Gregoire, 151 F.3d 1180, 1183-84 (9th Cir.1998). No *376 case or controversy exists, and the appeal is moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

McCann v. State of Mississippi
S.D. Mississippi, 2024
Young v. Swaney
S.D. Ohio, 2024
Louis Matthew Clements v. State of Florida
59 F.4th 1204 (Eleventh Circuit, 2023)
Alan Johnson v. Lorie Davis, Director
697 F. App'x 274 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
582 F. App'x 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-sullivan-v-william-stephens-director-ca5-2014.