Mummert v. Warden-SCI-Laurel Highlands
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry)This Court is satisfied that based on the present circumstances, dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute is warranted. If Petitioner provides this Court with his current address within a reasonable period of time, this determination will be reconsidered. An appropriate Order will enter.Signed by Honorable Richard P. Conaboy on 10/11/16. (cc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
AARON GABRIEL MUMMERT,
CIVIL NO. 3:CV-15-1946
WARDEN SCI-LAUREL HIGHLANDS,
Aaron Gabriel Mummert initiated this pro se petition for writ
of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 while incarcerated at
the the laurel Highlands State Correctional Institution, Somerset,
Petitioner subsequently notified the Court that he
was transferred to the State Correctional Institution, Pittsburgh,
Petitioner challenges the legality of his April 3, 2014
conviction on charges of fleeing and attempting to elude a police
officer and tampering or fabrication physical evidence following a
jury trial in the Adams County Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas.
Following service of the Petition, Respondents filed an answer and
memorandum of law arguing that the petition should be denied for
Mummert’s failure to exhaust state court remedies.
See Doc. 13.
They alternatively arged that Petitioner’s claims lacked merit.
By Order dated July 27, 2016 Petitioner’s motion requesting
leave to file an amendment to the petition was granted and his
proposed amendment was accepted.
See Doc. 17.
A copy of the July
27, 2016 Order which was mailed to Petitioner at SCI-Pittsburgh was
returned as undeliverable with a notation that Mummert had been
paroled on June 2, 2016.
See Doc. 18
A habeas corpus petition may be brought by a prisoner who
seeks to challenge either the fact or duration of his confinement
Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973), Telford v.
Hepting, 980 F.2d 745, 748 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 920
Federal habeas relief is available only “where the
deprivation of rights is such that it necessarily impacts the fact
or length of detention.”
Leamer v. Fauver, 288 F.3d 532, 540 (3d
Since Mummert is challenging the legality of his Adams
county conviction, this matter was properly raised under § 2254.
A pro se litigant has an affirmative obligation to keep the
court informed of his or her address.
M.D. Pa. Local Rule
If his or her address changes in the course of the
litigation, the litigant should immediately inform the court of
As discussed above, a review of the record reveals that a
copy of the July 27, 2016 Order entered in this matter was returned
See Doc. 18.
A follow up telephone call by the
Clerk of Court’s office to Petitioner’s last known place of
incarceration revealed that Petitioner was paroled on June 2, 2016.
Mummert has not advised this Court of his release from custody or
his current address nor made any filings in this matter since
February 12, 2016.
Mummert’s failure to advise this Court of his current
whereabouts indicates that he is no longer interested in pursuing
his request for federal habeas corpus relief and precludes this
Court from taking any further action in this matter.
It is also
noted that earlier in these proceedings Petitioner notified this
Court of a prior change in his address.
The inability of this Court to communicate with Petitioner is
solely the result of his own inaction and prevents the taking of
any other sanctions.
See Poulis v. State Farm, 747 F. 2d 863 (3d
Since Mummert’s present whereabouts are unknown, it
would be a waste of judicial resources to allow this action to
This Court is satisfied that based on the present
circumstances, dismissal of this action without prejudice for
failure to prosecute is warranted.
If Petitioner provides this
Court with his current address within a reasonable period of time,
this determination will be reconsidered.
An appropriate Order will
S/Richard P. Conaboy
RICHARD P. CONABOY
United States District Judge
DATED: OCTOBER 11, 2016
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?