Edwards v. Superintendent

Filing 10

OPINION AND ORDER: GRANTING 8 MOTION to Dismiss Petition as Moot. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 1/13/16. (jld) (cc: Edwards)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION
ANDRE EDWARDS,
Petitioner,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:15-CV-302

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the: (1) 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Habeas Corpus Petition by a State Prisoner Challenging a Prison
Disciplinary Proceeding, filed by Andre Edwards, a pro se prisoner,
on August 17, 2015 (DE #1); and (2) Motion to Dismiss Petition as
Moot, filed by the respondent on December 14, 2015 (DE #8).

For

the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss (DE #8) is
GRANTED and the petition (DE #1) is DISMISSED as MOOT.

BACKGROUND
Andrew Edwards filed this habeas corpus petition pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his loss of 60 days earned credit
time.

On

March

6,

2015,

in

case

number

MCF

15-02-0321,

a

Disciplinary Hearing Body (“DHB”) at Miami Correctional Facility
imposed that sanction after they found Edwards guilty of assault.

DISCUSSION
The respondent moves to dismiss, asserting that after the
petition was filed, Appeal Review Officer Joel Lytle, reconsidered
the case and has vacated the conviction and remanded for a new
hearing before a different DHB. (DE #8-1 at 1; Ex. A.) Accordingly,
the respondent argues that the petition is now moot. (DE #8.)
Edwards has not responded to the motion to dismiss.
Because Edward’s disciplinary sanction has been vacated and
the matter remanded for a new hearing, there is at present no
punishment lengthening the duration of confinement for this court
to review.
(prisoner

See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003)
can

challenge

disciplinary

determination

in

habeas

proceeding only when he has received punishment that lengthens the
duration of confinement).

In other words, there is no longer a

live controversy and the case must be dismissed as moot.

See Brown

v. Bartholomew Consol. Sch. Corp., 442 F.3d 588, 596 (7th Cir.
2006) (“For a case to be justiciable, a live controversy must
continue to exist at all stages of review, not simply on the date
the action was initiated.”).
outcome

of

the

new

If Edwards is dissatisfied with the

disciplinary

hearing,

he

can

pursue

his

administrative remedies and, if necessary, seek relief in a new
habeas petition.

CONCLUSION

2

For the reasons set forth above, the motion to dismiss (DE #8)
is GRANTED and the petition (DE #1) is DISMISSED as MOOT.

DATED: January 13, 2016

/s/ RUDY LOZANO, Judge
United States District Court

3