Tutstone v. U.S. of America

Filing 5

Memorandum of Opinion and Order. Habeas corpus is not the appropriate vehicle for petitioner to challenge his pending criminal proceedings as no exceptional circumstances exist. The petition is denied and this action dismissed. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. Judge John R. Adams on 12/29/11. (R,Sh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
ERIC TUTSTONE,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:11 CV 2577
JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

On November 28, 2011, Petitioner pro se Eric Tutstone filed the above-captioned in forma
pauperis habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner challenges his current pretial
detention at the Bedford Correctional Facility awaiting resolution of the criminal case against him
pending in this Court. United States v. Tutstone, Case No. 1:11 CR 004.
Petitioner asserts his continuing detention violates his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy
trial. Habeas corpus, however, is not the appropriate vehicle for him to challenge his pending
criminal proceedings.

The Supreme Court has held that “in the absence of exceptional

circumstances in criminal cases the regular judicial procedure should be followed and habeas corpus
should not be granted in advance of a trial.” Jones v. Perkins, 245 U.S. 390, 391 (1918); see also,
Sandles v. Hemmingway, 22 F. App’x 557, 557(6th Cir. 2001)(claim that would be dispositive of
underlying criminal charge must be exhausted at trial and on appeal before habeas corpus relief is
sought). The undersigned presided over the underlying criminal trial, which has now concluded. As
such, the Court is abundantly aware that no exceptional circumstances exist.
Accordingly, the Petition is denied and this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243.
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not
be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: December 29, 2011

s/John R. Adams
JOHN R. ADAMS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE