Donovan v. United States of America et al

Filing 3

Order: Plaintiff is able to challenge the disciplinary proceeding and seek a declaration of his rights in his habeas action, and this case is DISMISSED. Signed on 03/06/2018 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (jw)(copy of order mailed to plaintiff)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON JERRY LEE DONOVAN, Case No. 3:18-cv-00199-JR ORDER Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; RICHARD IVES, Warden, Defendants. _____________________________ MCSHANE, District Judge: Plaintiff, an inmate at Sheridan Federal Correctional Institution, brings this civil rights action and requests declaratory relief. Plaintiff did not submit the required $350.00 filing fee for civil rights cases, and an action may proceed without prepayment of the filing fee only upon a proper application to proceed in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Regardless, plaintiff’s claim must be dismissed. Plaintiff seeks a judgment declaring that his rights to due process were violated during a prison disciplinary hearing that resulted in the loss of good time credits. It is well established that a challenge to prison disciplinary proceedings resulting in the deprivation of good-time credits implicates the duration of confinement and must -1- ORDER be raised in a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 487-88 (1973); see also Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 (1997); Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974). In fact, plaintiff has filed a federal habeas petition challenging the disciplinary hearing in Donovan v. Ives, Case No. 3:18-cv-00198-JR. Accordingly, plaintiff is able to challenge the disciplinary proceeding and seek a declaration of his rights in his habeas action, and this case is DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 6th day of March, 2018. s/ Michael J. McShane Michael J. McShane United States District Judge -2- ORDER

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?