JENNINGS v. OBAMA et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE PETITION IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO PETITIONER FILING EITHER OR BOTH A PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 2254 OR A CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. SEC. 1983. IT IS FURTHER ORDER ED THAT THE CLERK SHALL PROVIDE PETITIONER WITH THIS COURT'S CURRENT FORMS FOR FILING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND FOR FIILING THE AFOREMENTIONED PLEADINGS. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS MATTER. THERE IS NO CAUSE FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR ON 10/2/13. 10/2/13 ENTERED AND COPY ORDER AND FORMS MAILED TO PRO SE PETITIONER. (jpd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DONALD JENNINGS

:
:
v.
:
:
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, et al. :

CIVIL ACTION

No. 13-5227

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
AND NOW, this 1st day of October, 2013, having considered the pro se petition
filed by Donald Jennings, I make the following findings and reach the following
conclusions:
1.

Petitioner is a state prisoner currently incarcerated in the State Correctional
Institution in Coal Township, Pennsylvania, serving a sentence for a
conviction obtained against him in the Court of Common Pleas for
Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania.

2.

In the instant petition, Petitioner alleges that he is filing a petition pursuant
to “28 U.S.C. § 2241, § 2254, § 2255 and to Reinstate/Take Jurisdiction of
All Criminal and Civil Proceedings.” He sets forth claims related to his
pretrial extradition, trial, sentencing, the execution of his sentence and
conditions of imprisonment. Petitioner seeks consolidation of “all
separately filed proceedings,” remedies for civil rights violations and
immediate release from imprisonment.

3.

In 2012, Petitioner filed a similar petition attacking his sentence and
alleging civil rights violations. Jennings v. Obama, No. 12-4234 (E.D. Pa.
August 6, 2012). Judge Legrome D. Davis dismissed that petition without
prejudice noting that “Petitioner may not file a consolidated petition seeking
joint or alternative remedies.” Id. Petitioner was directed to file either a
petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to U.S.C. § 2254 or a civil rights
complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Petitioner did neither. Instead, he
filed the instant petition including Judge Davis as a defendant. For the
same reasons set forth by Judge Davis, the instant petition will be dismissed
without prejudice.1

1

“Federal law opens two main avenues to relief on complaints related to imprisonment: a
petition for habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and a complaint under the Civil Rights Act of

Based upon the foregoing, I HEREBY ORDER that the petition is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Petitioner filing either or both a petition for habeas corpus
relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983.2
I FURTHER ORDER the Clerk of Court shall provide Petitioner with this
Court’s current forms for filing application to proceed in forma pauperis and for filing the
aforementioned pleadings. The Clerk of Court shall close this matter. There is no cause
for a certificate of appealability.

/s J. William Ditter, Jr.
J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR., J.

1871, Rev. Stat. § 1979, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749,
750 (2004). It is well settled that habeas corpus relief is the exclusive remedy when “a state
prisoner is challenging the very fact or duration of his physical imprisonment, and the relief he
seeks is a determination that he is entitled to immediate release or a speedier release from that
imprisonment.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973); see also Heck v. Humphrey,
512 U.S. 477, 481-82 (1994). The remedy for a constitutional challenge to the actions of a state
official acting under the color of state law is an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2

I note that a habeas petition would be properly filed in the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania as Petitioner is attacking a conviction obtained in the Court of Common Pleas of
Philadelphia County which is located within this district. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). However, a civil
rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 should be filed in the Middle District of
Pennsylvania as Petitioner is attacking the conditions of his confinement in a state prison located
in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) (a civil action should be brought
in the judicial district where all defendants reside, or in which the claim arose).
2