Before Schwelb and Ruiz, Associate Judges, and Pryor, Senior Judge.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ruiz, Associate Judge
Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia
(Hon. Iraline G. Barnes, Trial Judge)
Submitted September 26, 2000
Appellant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which the Superior Court denied without a hearing. We affirm.
The Superior Court of the District of Columbia sentenced William Hill on February 19, 1976, to twenty years to life for Murder I and possession of a prohibited weapon. The District of Columbia released him on parole on April 6, 1995. Hill was arrested on November 7, 1995, while he was on parole, for unlawful possession of a firearm, convicted in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1), and sentenced to fifty-seven months in prison. *fn2 Hill completed that sentence on December 23, 1999.
On November 20, 1995, after Hill's arrest on federal charges but before his conviction, the District of Columbia Board of Parole issued a warrant for his arrest for violating the conditions of his release. The warrant directed officers to execute it unless Hill was in custody, in which case they were directed to detain him and notify the Parole Board. The warrant stated:
You are hereby commanded to take said parolee, wherever found in the United States and return said parolee to the custody of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections, except if said parolee is already in the custody of Federal, state or District of Columbia authorities, do not execute this warrant. Place a detainer and notify the D.C. Board of Parole. (emphasis in original).
Appellant filed the instant writ of habeas corpus on November 13, 1998, while he was serving his federal sentence. After December 23, 1999, when his federal sentence was completed, Hill remained in custody in the federal prison in Manchester, Kentucky pursuant to the detainer warrant, awaiting a parole revocation hearing.
Hill argues that the Parole Board executed its detainer warrant on November 22, 1995, by providing him a copy. As such, he began to serve time on his prior District of Columbia conviction on that date. He also argues that he was denied a prompt parole revocation hearing as required by D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 28, §218.1 (1987). *fn3
This case presents in a somewhat odd fashion because Hill's habeas petition was filed against the D.C. Board of Parole at a time when Hill was incarcerated in a federal prison pursuant to a federal sentence. The parties do not agree whether Hill was, at the time of his petition, also incarcerated pursuant to District of Columbia law. The Board of Parole has produced Federal Bureau of Prisons records to show that Hill was serving a federal sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g) (1) at all times between November 7, 1995 and December 23, 1999, including the date he filed his petition, November 13, 1998. Hill, however, alleges that a detainer warrant issued by the D.C. Board of Parole was executed on November 20, 1995, and that execution caused him to resume his incarceration under his District of Columbia sentence. We address a potential jurisdictional issue lurking in this situation.
Petitions for habeas corpus by "a person committed detained, confined or restrained from his lawful liberty within the District" may be filed either in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the District of Columbia Superior Court. D.C. Code § 16-1901(a) (1997 Repl.). A writ of habeas corpus is "directed to the officer or other person in whose custody or keeping" the party has been placed. See id. The writ of habeas corpus is an order directing officials holding a prisoner in custody to produce that person before the court for a hearing on his claim for relief. See Bennett v. Ridley, 633 A.2d 824, 826 (D.C. 1993). Jurisdiction depends upon who is incarcerating the petitioner. Petitions directed to "Federal officers and employees" are filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, see D.C. Code § 16-901(b), while petitions "directed to any other person" are filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, see D.C. Code § 16-901(c). This court has held that a petitioner ...