Lige v. Metrish

Filing 23

ORDER Denying 22 Affidavit re claim for just compensation filed by Larry Lige. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

Lige v. Metrish

Doc. 23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

LARRY LIGE, JR., Petitioner, v. LINDA M. METRISH, Respondent. _____________________________/ ORDER DENYING CLAIM FOR JUST COMPENSATION On November 13, 2007, petitioner Larry Lige, Jr., filed a pro se application for the writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The habeas petition challenged Petitioner's Wayne County conviction for armed robbery, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.529. On November 13, 2009, the Court denied the petition in a memorandum opinion and order and declined to issue a certificate of appealability. On June 16, 2010, Petitioner moved to have the Court re-issue its memorandum opinion and order on the ground that he was never served with the opinion and order. The Court denied Petitioner's motion because he was not entitled to have his case reopened under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) or under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a). Pending before the Court is Petitioner's "Affidavit of Notice of Injuries and Damages, Claim for Just Compensation Due." The document alleges that the Court's case manager failed to serve Petitioner with the memorandum opinion and order CASE NO. 07-14871 HONORABLE JOHN CORBETT O'MEARA

Dockets.Justia.com

denying his habeas petition. Petitioner seeks $25 million dollars in compensation for being barred from appealing the denial of his habeas petition. "The writ of habeas corpus exists to allow a petitioner to attack and secure release from illegal custody." Lawrence v. 48th Dist. Court, 560 F.3d 475, 479 (6th Cir. 2009) (citing Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973). "[D]amages are not an available habeas remedy." Nelson v. Campbell, 541 U.S. 637, 646 (2004); accord Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750-51 (2004) (per curiam opinion recognizing that damages are unavailable in habeas); Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 342 (1997) (explaining that "the writ of habeas corpus is prospective in nature" and "does not compensate for past wrongful incarceration") (Rehnquist, C.J., dissenting); Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 554 (1974) (noting that the Supreme Court was careful to point out in Preiser v. Rodriguez that "habeas corpus is not an appropriate or available remedy for damages claims"). Petitioner therefore has no right to money damages in this habeas action, and his "Claim for Just Compensation" [Dkt. #22] is DENIED.

s/John Corbett O'Meara United States District Judge Date: April 8, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on this date, April 8, 2011, using the ECF system and upon Petitioner at Kinross Correctional Facility, 16770 S. Watertower Drive, Kincheloe, Michigan 49788 by first-class U.S. mail. s/William Barkholz Case Manager

2