Simmons v. Warden Gunja
Filing
3
Memorandum Opinion and Order denying re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) filed by John Simmons, Jr. and this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2243.. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. O'Malley on 3/17/08. (E,P)
Simmons v. Warden Gunja
Doc. 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO JOHN SIMMONS, JR., Petitioner, v. WARDEN GUNJA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:08 CV 327 JUDGE KATHLEEN M. O'MALLEY MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
On February 11, 2008, petitioner pro se John Simmons,Jr., an inmate at the Northeast Ohio Correctional Center (NEOCC), filed the above-captioned habeas corpus action. Petitioner seeks an
order reducing his federal sentence by two days for each day served at NEOCC, on the ground that "the conditions at the NEOCC
borderline on cruel and unusual punishment and this has caused him to serve a more onerous period of incarceration than that which was contemplated by the sentencing Court." cases in support of his request. As appropriate confinement. a threshold for Petitioner cites numerous
See Petition, p.5. habeas the corpus is not of the one's
matter,
vehicle
challenging
conditions
Abuhouran v. Morrison, No. 02-3427, 49 Fed.Appx. 349
(6th Cir. Sept. 18, 2002); Okoro v. Scibana, No. 99-1322, 1999 WL 1252871 (6th Cir. Dec. 15, 1999). Further, the cases cited by
Dockets.Justia.com
petitioner in support of his request for sentence modification all concern downward departures made by the trial court at sentencing. As such, they are wholly inapplicable here. 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.
s/ Kathleen M. O'Malley KATHLEEN M. O'MALLEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: March 17, 2008
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?