| Jones v. Cunningham | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 3, 1962 Decided January 14, 1963 | |
| Full case name | Jones v. Cunningham |
| Citations | 371 U.S. 236 (more) 83 S. Ct. 373; 9 L. Ed. 2d 285; 1963 U.S. LEXIS 2261 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 297 F.2d 851 (4th Cir. 1962); 313 F.2d 347 (4th Cir. 1963) |
| Holding | |
| A state prisoner who has been placed on parole, under the "custody and control" of a parole board, is "in custody" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2241; and, on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a Federal District Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine his charge that his state sentence was imposed in violation of the Federal Constitution. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Black, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| 28 USC 2241-2255 (habeas corpus) | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
| Pervear v. Massachusetts (1867) | |
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236 (1963), was a Supreme Court case in which the court first ruled that state inmates had the right to file a writ of habeas corpus challenging both the legality and the conditions of their imprisonment.[1] Prior to this, starting with Pervear v. Massachusetts, 72 U.S. 475 (1866),[2] the court had maintained a "hands off" policy regarding federal interference with state incarceration policies and practices, maintaining that the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states.[3] Subsequently, in Cooper v. Pate (1964),[4] an inmate successfully obtained standing to challenge the denial of his right to practice his religion through a habeas corpus writ.