The person to whom the writ is directed shall state in his or her return on the writ:
(1) Whether he or she has or has not the party in his or her custody or power or under
restraint;
(2) If he or she has the party in his or her custody or power or under restraint, he or
she shall set forth at large the authority, and the true and whole cause of the imprisonment
or restraint, with a copy of the writ, warrant, or other process, if any, upon which
the party is detained; and
(3) If he or she has had the party in his or her custody or power or under restraint and
has transferred custody or restraint to another, he or she shall state particularly
to whom, at what time, for what cause, and by what authority the transfer was made.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2
cases, 1965–1981 · leading case:
State v. Grieco, 430 A.2d 412 (R.I. 1981).
State v. Grieco, 430 A.2d 412 (R.I. 1981).
“General Laws 1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 10-9-8 (1980 Cum.Supp.). .The forfeiture proviso reads as follows: “Every person who shall have in custody or under his power any person entitled to any writ of habeas corpus, whether any writ has issued or not, and who shall, with intent…”
Evans v. Langlois, 207 A.2d 380 (R.I. 1965).
“The respondent has complied with the provisions of §10-9-8 in filing a return to the writ. We believe, however, that orderly procedure would be better served if respondent had included in such return the statements of fact which appear in his brief.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.