Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Mercer v. Cumberland, 96-2356 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Number: 96-2356 Visitors: 8
Filed: Oct. 16, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: ___________, Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.Craig J. Mercer on brief pro se., _______________, William R. Fisher, Ivy L. Frignoca and Monaghan, Leahy, Hochadel, _________________ _______________ _________________________, Libby on brief for appellee.that he stated a claim for unlawful detention.
USCA1 Opinion












[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________



No. 96-2356


CRAIG J. MERCER,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

SHERIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,

Defendant, Appellee.

____________________


APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________

____________________

Craig J. Mercer on brief pro se. _______________
William R. Fisher, Ivy L. Frignoca and Monaghan, Leahy, Hochadel _________________ _______________ _________________________
& Libby on brief for appellee. _______


____________________

October 14, 1997
____________________
















Per Curiam. Plaintiff-appellant Craig J. Mercer, __________

an Ohio prisoner, appeals pro se from the dismissal of his ___ __

complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging that the Sheriff of

Cumberland County (Maine) unlawfully detained Mercer and then

unlawfully transferred him to Ohio authorities, without an

extradition hearing, to face final parole revocation

proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A. We ___

affirm.

Contrary to Mercer's suggestion, we do not think

that he stated a claim for unlawful detention. Pursuant to

Maine's Uniform Act for Out-of-State Parolee Supervision, the

sheriff had the authority to detain Mercer pending the

preliminary parole revocation hearing in Maine, and, since it

appeared that a retaking was likely, for a reasonable time

thereafter. Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 34-A, 9861. We are

not persuaded that the length of detention in the instant

case was unreasonable. The Uniform Act for Out-of-

State Parolee Supervision also permits the retaking of a

parolee subject to the Act without "formalities" other than

"establishing the authority of the officer and the identity

of the person to be retaken." Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 34-A,

9803. Mercer makes no argument that this Act incorporates

the procedural protections afforded by Maine's Criminal

Extradition Act, and the language of 9803 would suggest the

contrary. Under the circumstances, and passing without



-2-













deciding the question whether a failure to comply with

extradition procedures creates a cause of action under

1983, we find no error in the dismissal.

Affirmed. ________













































-3-






Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer