Brown v. Wesley et al
Filing
11
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 10 Final Judgment. Signed by District Judge Michael P. Mills on 5/28/14. (cr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
CHARLES BROWN
PETITIONER
v.
No. 4:13CV155-MPM-JMV
WARDEN GLORIA WESLEY
RESPONDENTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on the pro se petition of Charles Brown for a writ of
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The State has moved to dismiss the petition for failure to state
a claim upon which relief could be granted. Brown has not responded to the motion, and the deadline
for response has expired. For the reasons set forth below, the State’s motion to dismiss will be
granted, and the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus will be dismissed for failure to state a
claim upon which relief could be granted.
Facts and Procedural Posture
Charles Brown filed his federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus on September 3, 2013. In
that document, he alleged that he was housed at the Bolivar County Correctional Facility in
Cleveland, Mississippi. He had been arrested on a Wisconsin warrant alleging that he had failed to
register as a sex offender. Though Brown was “booked in” to the Bolivar County Correctional
Facility on June 13, 2013, for contempt of court, he was transferred on October 20, 2013, to the state
of Wisconsin. He has since returned to this state, resides in Cleveland, Mississippi, and is no longer in
custody. Brown alleges in the instant petition that: (1) he was illegally detained, (2) that he was not
taken before a judge in a timely manner, (3) that he was not permitted to have an attorney, and (4) that
he was denied reasonable access to court.
Discussion
As Brown has been released, he no longer meets the requirements for seeking federal habeas
corpus relief, as he is not “in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United
States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). For this reason, the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus under
28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. A
final judgment consistent with this memorandum opinion will issue today.
SO ORDERED, this, the 28th day of May, 2014.
/s/ Michael P. Mills
CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
-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?