Mikail Sajjaad Muhammad v. Kentucky Parole Board

Summary

The court reached the merits despite the expiration of Muhammad's sentence because the plea-breach and habeas questions satisfied the public-interest exception to mootness. It held that habeas corpus was unavailable because Muhammad had adequate ordinary remedies, including a direct challenge, post-conviction relief, and mandamus to challenge the parole revocation, and because the alleged plea breach did not render the judgment void. The court affirmed the Court of Appeals' reversal of the habeas order. Judge Cunningham, concurring in result only, would have dismissed the appeal as moot and declined to address the habeas issue.