Lacy v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections

Filing 2

OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Ronald A. White : Denying 1 Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (case dismissed) (acg, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

CHRISTOPHER L. LACY,
Petitioner,
v.
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CIV 13-487-RAW

OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner, an inmate in the custody of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections
(DOC) who is incarcerated at Davis Correctional Facility in Holdenville, Oklahoma, has filed
this petition for a writ of mandamus, pursuant to Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 1451:
The writ of mandamus may be issued by the Supreme Court or the district
court, or any justice or judge thereof, during term, or at chambers, to any
inferior tribunal, corporation, board or person, to compel the performance of
any act which the law specially enjoins as a duty, resulting from an office, trust
or station; but though it may require an inferior tribunal to exercise its
judgment or proceed to the discharge of any of its functions, it cannot control
judicial discretion.
Id.
Petitioner is complaining that DOC officials are obstructing his access to the courts
by not allowing him to pursue all his DOC administrative remedies regarding credit for his
jail time. He, therefore, is unable to file a lawsuit against DOC for its refusal to correct the
length of his sentence. He asks the court to issue a writ of mandamus to compel DOC
officials to respond to his grievance or to give him full credit on his sentence for the time he

served in county jails.
The court has carefully reviewed the record and construes petitioner’s pleading
liberally. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972). Although his petition is unclear, the
court finds it is not the appropriate cause of action for the claims he is presenting. The
proper cause of action for challenging credit for his jail time would be a petition for a writ
of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Furthermore, this court lacks the authority
to issue a writ of mandamus under Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 1451.
ACCORDINGLY, petitioner’s petition for a writ of mandamus (Docket No. 1) is
DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED. The Court Clerk is directed to send petitioner the
form and instructions for filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241, along with the form and instructions for filing a motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of October 2013.

Dated this 31 st day of October, 2013.

J4h4i0

2