Agee v. State

6 Citing cases

  1. Phillips v. Jones

    CA 00-0741-RV-C (S.D. Ala. Jan. 16, 2001)

    However, we do not accept Phillips's contention that the mere fact that an indictment sought in 1978 was "no billed" — while Phillips was still at large and under a thirty-year sentence of imprisonment — had the legal effect of rendering Phillips's departure from prison a "release," as opposed to an escape, or of establishing that Phillips's twenty-year absence from the Department's custody was "through no fault of his own." Cf. Ex parte Agee, 474 So.2d 161, 163 (Ala. 1985). As this is the substance of Phillips's argument, we find that Phillips has failed to allege facts which, if true, entitle him to the relief he seeks in his habeas petition.

  2. Pugh v. State

    563 So. 2d 601 (Miss. 1990)   Cited 4 times

    Many courts have cited White for the proposition: (1) that an inmate who says nothing when he is erroneously released is not "at fault," and (2) that released inmate's sentence continued to run during the time he was at liberty. See, e.g., Green v. Christiansen, 732 F.2d 1397, 1400 (9th Cir. 1984); Lanier v. Williams, 361 F. Supp. 944, 947 (E.D.N.C. 1973); Ex parte Agee, 474 So.2d 161, 163 (Ala. 1985); Carson v. State, 489 So.2d 1236, 1238 (Fla.Ct.App. 1986). These courts clearly misconstrued White. The Tenth Circuit Court in White specifically noted that "we do not now consider" the issue: "[W]hether a[n inmate], who knows a mistake is being made and says nothing, [should be deemed] at fault."

  3. Brown v. Brittain

    773 P.2d 570 (Colo. 1989)   Cited 14 times
    In Brittain, for example, our supreme court acknowledged that a prisoner who was mistakenly released through no fault of his own may receive credit against his sentence for the time he was at liberty, in part because the "failure to attempt to regain custody of the prisoner within a reasonable time constitutes a waiver of jurisdiction over the prisoner." Id.

    Many courts have cited Pearlman for the proposition that a prisoner who says nothing when mistakenly released is not "at fault," with the result that the prisoner's sentence ran during the time he was at liberty. Green v. Christiansen, 732 F.2d 1397, 1400 (9th Cir. 1984); Lanier v. Williams, 361 F. Supp. 944, 947 (E.D.N.C. 1973); Ex parte Agee, 474 So.2d 161, 163 (Ala. 1985); Giles v. State, 462 So.2d 1063, 1064 (Ala.App. 1985); People v. Battle, 742 P.2d 952, 953-54 (Colo.App. 1987); People v. Incerto, 38 Colo. App. 390, 393, 557 P.2d 1217, 1220 (1976); Carson v. State, 489 So.2d 1236, 1238 (Fla.App. 1986). These cases, however, fail to recognize that Pearlman expressly refused to decide whether a prisoner who says nothing when mistakenly released is "at fault" for purposes of deciding whether he should receive credit for the time he was at liberty.

  4. Anderson v. State

    710 So. 2d 491 (Ala. Crim. App. 1997)   Cited 3 times

    "[T]he Alabama Supreme Court has held that the sentence of an inmate erroneously released without violation of a condition of his parole and through no fault of the inmate's own continues to run while the inmate is free. See Ex parte Agee, 474 So.2d 161, 163 (Ala. 1985) (relying on White v. Pearlman, 42 F.2d 788, 789 (10th Cir. 1930)). See also McCall v. State, 594 So.2d 733 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992); Giles v. State, 462 So.2d 1063 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985).

  5. McCorvey v. State

    675 So. 2d 81 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995)   Cited 3 times

    McCorvey is correct in his assertion that the Alabama Supreme Court has held that the sentence of an inmate erroneously released without violation of a condition of his parole and through no fault of the inmate's own continues to run while the inmate is free. See Ex parte Agee, 474 So.2d 161, 163 (Ala. 1985) (relying on White v. Pearlman, 42 F.2d 788, 789 (10th Cir. 1930)). See also McCall v. State, 594 So.2d 733 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992); Giles v. State, 462 So.2d 1063 (Ala.Cr.App. 1985).

  6. Agee v. State

    474 So. 2d 164 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985)

    CLARK, Retired Circuit Judge. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed and this case is remanded with directions on the authority of Ex parte Arthur Agee, 474 So.2d 161 (Ala. 1985). REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.