Pierce (ID 58077) v. Cline

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: The petition for habeas corpus is dismissed. Petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is granted. Signed by U.S. Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 01/17/18. Mailed to pro se party Christopher Pierce by regular mail. (smnd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

CHRISTOPHER PIERCE,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO. 18-3012-SAC

SAM CLINE,
Respondent.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a petition for habeas corpus
filed by a prisoner in state custody. The petition seeks release from
confinement on the ground of attempted murder.
Background
It appears from attachments to the petition, which are documents
submitted to the Kansas Supreme Court in an original action filed
there,1 that in September 2017 petitioner was denied medications,
including pills for high blood pressure and a rescue inhaler at a pill
line at the Lansing Correctional Facility. A response in that action
states that petitioner was denied the blood pressure medication in
the pill line because of his classification as “treatment bed status”,
meaning that the pills are brought to his bedside. The inquiry also
showed that the inhaler prescription expired in July and was not
renewed by the provider; however, in October 2017, in response to the
action, the prison health administrator contacted the provider
concerning renewal of the prescription and expected the inhaler to
arrive shortly. (Doc. #1, Attach., p. 4.) The Kansas Supreme Court

1

Pierce v. Cline, Case No. 118224 (Kan. Sup. Ct. Nov. 16, 2017).

denied relief on November 16, 2017.
Discussion
The present petition appears to seek release from confinement
due to petitioner’s conditions of confinement. However, this is not
a basis for habeas corpus relief. It is settled law that a prisoner
who wishes to challenge the conditions of his confinement must proceed
in a civil rights action, not a federal habeas corpus petition.
Palma-Salazar v. Davis, 677 F.3d 1031, 1035 (10th Cir. 2012).
In contrast, a habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 is used to challenge “the execution of a sentence rather than
its validity”, Brace v. United States, 634 F.3d 1167, 1169 (10th Cir.
2011).
Because the present petition does not state a basis for habeas
corpus relief, the Court concludes the petition must be dismissed.
IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED the petition for habeas
corpus is dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis (Doc. #2) is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

This 17th day of January, 2018, at Topeka, Kansas.

S/ Sam A. Crow
SAM A. CROW
U.S. Senior District Judge