United States District Court, D. Nebraska
RONALD C. LONGSON, Petitioner,
STATE OF NEBRASKA, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge
Petitioner is set to serve his two-day jail sanctions for a
violation of his conditions of probation this coming Saturday
and because he seeks a stay, I have expedited this initial
review of Petitioner's habeas corpus
petition. I now deny the petition and stay motion with
prejudice. No certificate of appealability will be issued.
and summarized, Longson claims that the District Court of
Lancaster County, Nebraska lacked jurisdiction to impose a
two-day jail sanctions for failing to show up for a urine
test. He claims that there was no jurisdiction because the
state district court did not have the rules that governed the
transfer of his supervision to Nebraska from Montana. He also
claims that no prosecutor was present when sanctions were
imposed and the state district judge and the probation
officer handled the matter alone thus violating his due
process rights. Longson does not dispute that he was present
in court, testified, and was represented by counsel at the
introductory matter, I take judicial notice of state court
records available online to this court. See Stutzka v.
McCarville, 420 F.3d 757, 761, n.2 (8th Cir. 2005)
(court may take judicial notice of public records);
Federal Rule of Evidence 201 (providing for judicial
notice of adjudicative facts).
take judicial notice of the Interstate Compact for Adult
Offender Supervision (ICAOS) which has the
force of federal law. ICAOS Bench Book for Judges and Court
Personnel, at p. 7 (2017 Edition). The ICAOS
authorizes the adoption of rules by the Interstate Commission
for Adult Offender Supervision. These rules carry the weight
of federal law, and I take judicial notice of them as well.
Id. Nebraska is a member of the Compact.
background of this case may be found in the Nebraska Supreme
Court opinion affirming the two-day jail sanctions which is
at the heart of this dispute, State v. Longson,
S-17-0231 (Dec. 21, 2017) (since Longson's challenge to the
sanctions depended upon the ICAOS rules and Longson
failed to include them in the record, the decision appealed
from would be affirmed) and the related record and briefs
filed with that court.
October 2015, Longson was placed on probation in Montana for
a felony theft offense. The record does not contain an actual
copy of the court order or judgment for his conviction and
sentence, but the documentation in the record reflected that
he was sentenced to 1 year, 5 months and 7 days of probation.
His probation term began on October 13, 2015 and was
scheduled to end on March 20, 2017. None of these details are
November 2015, a month after his probation term began,
Longson moved to Nebraska and signed a Nebraska Interstate
Compact Offender Agreement, agreeing that he would continue
be subject to probation in Nebraska. The terms of his
probation are set forth in the Compact Agreement and an
accompanying Courtesy Supervision Guidelines Interstate
Transfer. Among other conditions, the terms of his probation
provided that he would be subject to administrative and
custodial sanctions, including but not limited to
“custodial sanctions of 1-30 days detention, of up to
90 total days in duration.” None of these details are
February 2017, Longson's probation officer in Nebraska,
Jeff Hamilton of the Nebraska Probation Office District #3A,
filed with the District Court of Lancaster County, Nebraska a
“Request for Imposition of Custodial Sanction” as
well as an “Affidavit in Support of Imposition of
Custodial Sanction.” The affidavit states that Longson
had been administratively sanctioned several times for
various reasons, such as missing drug and alcohol testing or
failing to pay fines, and had continued to miss further
testing appointments despite such sanctions. The affidavit
therefore requested that the court impose “custodial
sanctions” of 2 days in jail.
local prosecutor was granted leave to withdraw because he was
uncertain what jurisdiction his office had over the matter
since the underlying sentence came from Montana. Ultimately,
the case proceeded without a prosecutor to a probation
violation hearing with the district court judge, the
probation officer, the defendant and his counsel present.
court asked Longson's counsel how counsel wished to
proceed and Longson's counsel requested that the case be
dismissed due to a lack of jurisdiction. Longson's
counsel argued that while the probation office in Nebraska
had authority to supervise and impose
“administrative” sanctions upon Longson, the
court lacked authority to impose ...