Verner v. Anderson

Filing 23

ORDER AND JUDGMENT adopting Report and Recommendations (Doc. 21); petitioner's exceptions filed herein are CONSIDERED and OVERRULED; petitioner is DENIED leave to proceed in forma pauperis; and, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMIS SED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed on 09/08/2011 by District Judge Dean Whipple. (Willis, Kathy) Modified on 9/8/2011 (Willis, Kathy). Clerk of the Court shall mail, via certified, return receipt requested, a copy of this Order to petitioner at his last known address.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHERN DIVISION

JAMES EDWARD VERNER,
Petitioner,
v.
JUAN CASTILLO, Warden,
United States Medical Center,
Respondent.

)
)
)
) Civil Action No. 10-3384-CV-S-DW-H
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT
Pursuant to the governing law and in accordance with Local Rule 72.1 of the United States
District Court for the Western District of Missouri, the petition herein for writ of habeas corpus was
referred to the United States Magistrate for preliminary review under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §
636 (b).
The United States Magistrate has completed his preliminary review of the petition herein for
a writ of habeas corpus and has submitted to the undersigned a report and recommendation that the
petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice.
Petitioner has filed written exceptions to the report and recommendation of the Magistrate
in which he continues to challenge his housing in administrative segregation. He specifically
contends that respondent is not conducting meaningful reviews of his security status because his
serious medical condition is not being taken into consideration. He asserts that his pulmonary
hypertension has progressed to a point that he is not physically able to pose a risk to other inmates

1

or staff.
Having fully reviewed the record de novo, this Court agrees with the Magistrate that the
petition should be dismissed because petitioner has failed to state a constitutional violation. Clearly,
based on petitioner’s serious violent history, including violence in prison, the Medical Center has
acted within its discretion in assigning him to administrative segregation for the safety and security
of the institution. It should be noted, moreover, that petitioner is housed at the Medical Center to
effectively treat his serious medical condition, and he does not complain about that care. There is
nothing in the record to indicate that the due process review process is conducted in violation of
petitioner’s rights. The Court agrees with the Magistrate’s conclusion that petitioner has failed to
assert a claim that rises to the level of a due process violation.
Based on the file and records in this case, it is concluded that the findings of fact, conclusions
of law, and proposed actions of the Magistrate are correct and should be approved. It is therefore
ORDERED that petitioner's exceptions filed herein be, and they are hereby, CONSIDERED
and OVERRULED. It is further
ORDERED that petitioner be, and he is hereby, denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
It is further
ADJUDGED that the petition herein for a writ of habeas corpus be, and it is hereby,
dismissed without prejudice.
/s/ Dean Whipple
DEAN WHIPPLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Date: September 8, 2011

2