Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.

PETITIONER: Browder
RESPONDENT: Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.
LOCATION: Beth Israel Hospital

DOCKET NO.: 76-5325
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1975-1981)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

CITATION: 434 US 257 (1978)
ARGUED: Oct 31, 1977
DECIDED: Jan 10, 1978

ADVOCATES:
Kenneth N. Flaxman - for petitioner
Raymond McKoski - for respondent

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - October 31, 1977 in Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - January 10, 1978 in Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.

Warren E. Burger:

The judgment and opinion of the court in 76-5325 Browder against Illinois will be announced by Mr. Justice Powell.

Lewis F. Powell, Jr.:

The petitioner in this case was convicted in a Illinois court of rape.

After exhausting state remedies he sought Habeas Corpus relief in the Federal District Court in Illinois.

That Court held that petitioner had been arrested without probable cause and ordered his relief unless he should retried.

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed this judgment on its merits.

Petitioner however had contended that the State had failed to appeal within the time prescribed on the Federal rules of civil and appellate procedure and that therefore the Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.

And we agree with the petitioner on this jurisdictional issue.

We do not reach the merits.

The question of some interest of lawyers and judges that prompted us to review this case, consents the applicability of certain of the rules of civil procedure to Habeas Corpus proceedings.

For reasons stated in our opinion filed with the clerk today.

We hold that these rules do apply and the state's appeal not having been filed within the 30 days of the original order by the District Court was not timely under the rules.

Accordingly we conclude that the Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to review the District Courts order.

We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

Mr. Justice Blackmun has filed a concurring opinion.