Cummings v. Allen

Filing 3

ORDER dismissing without prejudice 2 Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; dismissing as moot 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Herbert Cummings. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 11/3/2011. (jct)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION HERBERT CUMMINGS v. PETITIONER CASE NO.: 3:11CV00215-JMM-BD MIKE ALLEN, Sheriff, Crittenden County, Arkansas RESPONDENT ORDER Herbert Cummings brings a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Docket entry #1) In the petition, Mr. Cummings claims he is currently being held in the Crittenden County Detention in violation of his constitutional rights, because there are no charges pending against him. Unfortunately for Mr. Cummings, this Court is without jurisdiction to hear his petition. Under 28 U.S.C. §2254, a habeas petition may be brought in the district court only “on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.” 28 U.S.C. §2254(b)(emphasis added). Here, Mr. Cummings states that he is being held without having been convicted of anything and with no pending charges against him. Thus, Mr. Cummings is not in custody under a judgment of the State court, and this court lacks jurisdiction to hear his claim. Mr. Cummings’s petition for writ of habeas corpus (#2) is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, and his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (#1) is dismissed as moot. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED, this 3rd day of November, 2011. _______________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?