Sailes v. Warden Gunja
Memorandum Opinion and Order. For the reasons stated within, the peition is denied and this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 USC 2243. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 USC 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge John R. Adams on 5/14/08. (R,Sh)
Sailes v. Warden Gunja
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO JOSEPH SAILES, Petitioner, v. WARDEN GUNJA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:08 CV 796 JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
On March 28, 2008, petitioner pro se Joseph Sailes, an inmate at the Northeast Ohio Correctional Center (NEOCC), filed the abovecaptioned habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 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." Petitioner
cites numerous cases in support of his request. See Petition, p.5. As a threshold matter, habeas corpus is not the appropriate vehicle for challenging the conditions of one's confinement.
Abuhouran v. Morrison, No. 02-3427, 49 Fed.Appx. 349 (6th Cir. Sept. 18, 2002); Okoro v. Scibana, No. 99-1322, 1999 WL 1252871 at *2 (6th Cir. Dec. 15, 1999); Heck v Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994).
Further, the cases cited by 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.
DATE: May 14, 2008
/s/ John R. Adams JOHN R. ADAMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?