SMITH v. BAYSINGER

Filing 16

Entry Discussing Motion for Reconsideration; the petitioners motion to reconsider, styled asa motion to amend order to show cause (dkt 15), is denied. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 12/23/2010. (served by us mail)(VS)

SMITH v. BAYSINGER

Doc. 16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA ERIC D. SMITH, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT BASINGER, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 2:10-cv-292-WTL-DML

Entry Discussing Motion for Reconsideration "A motion to reconsider asks that a decision be reexamined in light of additional legal arguments, a change of law, or an argument that was overlooked earlier . . . ." Patel v. Gonzales 442 F.3d 1011, 1015-16 (7th Cir. 2006). In this case, habeas petitioner Eric Smith seeks reconsideration of the portion of the Entry issued on November 16, 2010, wherein the court summarily dismissed as legally insufficient the claim from his petition in which he alleged that the punishment he received after having been found to have violated prison conduct rules was excessive. The court properly explained in the challenged Entry that the petition for writ of habeas corpus was subject to preliminary review pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings in the United States District Court. The court then explained in summarily dismissing claim three that violations of state law will not support relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). The character of the dismissed claim three has been identified. The severity of the sanctions imposed does not present a cognizable claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) in the circumstances of this case. See Townsend v. Burke, 334 U.S. 736, 741 (1948)("The [petitioner's] sentence being within the limits set by the statute, its severity would not be grounds for relief here even on direct review of the conviction, much less on review of the state court's denial of habeas corpus."); Koo v. McBride, 124 F.3d 869, 875 (7th Cir. 1997) (the issue of sentencing within the parameters of state law is ordinarily outside the realm of federal habeas review). Based on the foregoing, therefore, the petitioner's motion to reconsider, styled as a motion to amend order to show cause (dkt 15), is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________________ Date: 12/23/2010 Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana

Dockets.Justia.com

Distribution: [e-mail] Eric D. Smith DOC #112675 Wabash Valley Correctional Facility 6908 S. Old U.S. Highway 41 P.O. Box 1111 Carlisle, IN 47838-1111