Case Summary

Claus Hubbard filed a writ of habeas after claiming to be unlawfully imprisoned without cause or warning. When Hubbard's lawyers went to the jail and asked what he was incarcerated for, the jailer claimed that he was arrested for vagrancy, but then changed his answer suggesting instead, that he was jailed for being a “suspicious character" which was not an offense of the law. His lawyers claimed that it was common practice for the Omaha police to throw people in jail with the goal of running them out of town. Hubbard was characterized as being a black man who had previously protested against the chief of police for throwing other black people in jail without cause and leaving them there for “indefinite lengths of time.” Therefore, Hubbard believed his arrest was retaliation from the chief. He also was in bad health and thought that if he had to stay in jail “it might even cause his death.” Ultimately, his The petition was granted and he was allowed to have his case brought to the court. However, the fate of the bound party is unknown.

Case Information

Petition type(s)

• Carceral

Petition subtype(s)

• Vagrancy
• Wrongful imprisonment

Sites of significance

• Omaha City Jail (Omaha, Nebraska)

Outcome

Writ allowed

Fate of bound party

Released from custody

State

• Nebraska

Tag(s)

• Punitive vagrancy
• Politics

People

• Hubbard, Claus (petitioner)
• Hubbard, Claus (bound party)
• Scott, Cunningham R. (judge)
• Thomas, Elmer E. (petitioner attorney)

• Additional parties

  Albyn, Frank L. (Clerk)

  Miles, Miles (Deputy)

  Gordon, S. I. (Police Judge);