Kinchloe v. Sherry

Filing 38

ORDER denying Petitioner's 27 Motion for Judicial Oversight of All Medication and 28 , 29 Motions for Mandatory Injunction. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (JOwe)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION PAUL KINCHLOE, Petitioner, Case Number: 2:07-CV-12460 v. HONORABLE PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE JERI ANN SHERRY, Respondent. / ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT OF ALL MEDICATION (ECF NO. 27), AND MOTIONS FOR MANDATORY INJUNCTION (ECF NO. 28 & 29) Paul Andrew Kinchloe (Petitioner), a prisoner in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus. This was Petitioner’s second habeas petition challenging the same conviction. The Court issued an order transferring the petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit because Petitioner had not received authorization to file a successive petition as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2243(b)(3). The Court of Appeals dismissed the action for want of prosecution. See In re: Paul Andrew Kinchloe, No. 14-2598 (6th Cir. Feb. 12, 2015) (ECF No. 22). Now before the Court are three motions filed by Petitioner: “Motion for Judicial Oversight of All Medication with Security in Camera Examination of When Seal to Medication is Broken...”; “Motion for Mandatory Injunction Against Michigan Department of Psychology/Psychiatry ... Barring Any and All Psychological Evaluation...”; and “Mandatory Inunction Against the MDOC Psych Department...”. Petitioner’s motions all concern the alleged unethical conduct of prison psychologists, psychiatrists, and those under the supervision of prison psychologists and psychiatrists. Petitioner claims that the medical staff is attempting to create a hostile environment for him, tampering with this medication, and indirectly threatening him. The allegations raised in these motions and the relief sought are unrelated to the habeas corpus proceeding and, therefore, the motion is not properly filed in this closed case. Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion for Judicial Oversight (ECF No. 27), and Motions for Mandatory Injunction (Dkt. 28 & 29) are DENIED. SO ORDERED. s/Paul D. Borman PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: March 1, 2017 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on March 1, 2017. s/Julie Owens Acting on Behalf of Deborah Tofil Case Manager 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?