Smith v. Hobbs
ORDER denying 49 Motion for Reconsideration re 46 Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 5/14/12. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
JAMES EDWARD SMITH,
ADC # 103093
RAY HOBBS, Director, Arkansas
Department of Correction
Case No. 5:10-CV-00199 JTK
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
BEFORE THE COURT is Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 49) of the
Court’s Order Dismissing the Petition for Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 46). After reviewing
Petitioner’s motion and the previous order, the Court finds no basis for reconsidering the
dismissal of the petition.
The order of dismissal sufficiently explained why the Court found that 1) there has been
no enhancement of Petitioner’s sentence, 2) Petitioner had failed to exhaust his remedies, and 3)
Petitioner failed to raise any issues of federal law. Petitioner also appears to takes issue with the
fact that his action, which was originally filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was converted to a
habeas petition by the Court (Doc. No. 3). The order that made this change explained that doing
so was proper because Petitioner sought injunctive relief solely concerning the execution of his
sentence. “[Section] 1983 must yield to the more specific federal habeas statute, with its
attendant procedural and exhaustion requirements, where an inmate seeks injunctive relief
challenging the fact of his conviction or the duration of his sentence.” Nelson v. Campbell, 541
U.S. 637, 643 (2004).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No.
49) be DENIED.
SO ORDERED this 14th day of May, 2012.
United States Magistrate Judge
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?