Keith v. Outlaw
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 in substance, with a brief supplement to respond to the objection filed by plaintiff. His claim that Florida authorities denied him "gain time" credit is still an abuse of the writ now. It ov erlaps with the claim made in his first habeas petition, and it could have been made then. The 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Michael Keith is dismissed with prejudice. No certificate of appealability will issue. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/21/13. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
T.C. OUTLAW, Warden,
Federal Correctional Complex,
Forrest City, Arkansas
Keith has objected to Magistrate Judge Beth Deere's recommendation,
NQ 14, that the Court dismiss his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as an
abuse of the writ. On de novo review, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3), the Court adopts
Judge Deere's recommendation in substance, with a brief supplement to
respond to Keith's objection.
Keith's clarified claim is that, pursuant to policy, Florida authorities
denied him "gain time" credit for the part of his state sentence he spent on a
writ for prosecution by federal authorities. This claim is still an abuse of the
writ now. It overlaps with the claim made in his first habeas petition; and it
could have been made then. If the Court is wrong about this procedural bar,
the Court would deny Keith's petition on the merits because he has not made
out a constitutional violation. "The State is entitled ... within reasonable and
constitutional limits, [to] control the contours of the liberty interest it
creates[,]" such as" gain time" credit against a sentence. Waddell v. Department
of Correction, 680 F.3d 384, 389 (4th Cir. 2012) (quotation omitted). Keith's
petition is dismissed with prejudice. No certificate of appealability will issue.
D.P. Marshall r.
United States District Judge
21 June 2013
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?