Castaneda v. Watson

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part 11 MOTION for Summary Judgment or Alternatively Motion to Dismiss Petitioner's Motion for Relief Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, dismissing without prejudice Castaneda's civil rights claims for denial of adequate medical care at FCI-Bastrop. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION

CIRILO CASTANEDA,
BOP #49185-177,

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Petitioner,
V.

WARDEN T.J. WATSON,
Respondent.

ENTERED
March 28, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-17-3706

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Federal prisoner Cirilo Castaneda (BOP #49185-177) has filed
a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S. C.
("Petition")

(Docket Entry No. 1).

§

2241

Now pending is the Respondent

United States' Motion for Summary Judgment or Alternatively Motion
to Dismiss Petitioner's Motion for Relief Under 28 U.S.C.
("Respondent's Motion")
filed

a

response

and

(Docket Entry No. 11).
his

reviewing the pleadings,
Motion,

in part,

time

to

do

so

has

§

2241

Castaneda has not
expired.

After

the court will grant the Respondent's

and will dismiss the Petition for the reasons

explained below.
I.

Castaneda
April 9,

2015,

was

convicted

Background

pursuant

to

his

guilty

plea

on

to charges of aiding and abetting the possession

with intent to distribute 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana.
See United States v.

Castaneda,

Crim.

No.

H-11-cr-472-06

(S.D.

Tex.).

In a

judgment

entered on December

8,

received a sentence of 70 months' imprisonment.
and

he

is

currently

serving

his

sentence

Castaneda

2016,

He did not appeal
at

the

Federal

Correctional Complex in Beaumont, Texas ("FCC Beaumont").
On December 4, 2017, Castaneda filed the pending Petition for
habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.

§

2241. 1

In several over-

lapping grounds Castaneda contends that he is entitled to relief
because the Health Services Administrator

( "HSA Powell")

at the

Federal Correctional Institution in Bastrop ("FCI Bastrop"), where
Castaneda

was

previously

confined,

failed

to

request

medical

records from the Fort Bend County Jail and denied him adequate
medical care in the form of Ibuprofen for chronic pain. 2
that

he

was

denied

adequate

medical

care

with

Alleging

deliberate

indifference, Castaneda seeks monetary damages for the violation of
his Eighth Amendment rights. 3
The respondent argues

that

the Petition must be dismissed

because the relief sought is not available under 28 U.S.C.

§

2241. 4

Noting further that the Petition was not properly filed in this
district, the respondent contends that Castaneda's allegations lack
merit and fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 5

1

Petition, Docket Entry No. 1, p. 9.

2

Id. at 6-7.

3

Id. at 8.

4

Respondent's Motion, Docket Entry No. 11, p. 10.

5

Id. at 5, 10-17.
-2-

II.
A.

Discussion

Castaneda Does Not State a Claim for Habeas Relief

The writ of habeas corpus provides a remedy for prisoners who
challenge the

"fact or duration"

of their confinement and seek

"immediate release or a speedier release from that imprisonment."
Preiser v.

Rodriguez,

93

S.

Ct.

1827,

1841

(1973).

petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.

§

Thus,

a

2241 may be

used to challenge the manner in which a sentence is executed or, if
certain criteria are met, to collaterally attack the legality of a
conviction or sentence.
243 F.3d 893,

900-01

seeking relief under
in 28 U.S.C.

§

See, e.g., Reyes-Reguena v. United States,
(5th Cir.

§

2255,

2001)

(explaining that prisoners

2241 must satisfy the "savings clause" found
which is the primary means for a

federal

prisoner to attack his conviction); Jeffers v. Chandler, 253 F.3d
827,

830

(5th Cir.

2001)

(comparing collateral attacks upon a

conviction or sentence based on errors at trial or sentencing,
which

are

governed

by

28

U.S.C.

§

2255,

with

habeas

corpus

petitions challenging the manner in which a sentence is executed,
which are governed by 28 U.S.C.
Noting

that

Castaneda

2241)

§

seeks

monetary

damages

for

unconstitutional conditions of confinement, the respondent argues
that the Petition must be dismissed because the writ of habeas
corpus does not provide a remedy for such a claim. 6

See Cook v.

Texas Dep't of Criminal Justice Transitional Planning Dep't,

6

Respondent's Motion, Docket Entry No. 11, p. 10.
-3-

37

F.3d 166,

168

(5th Cir.

complaint under 42 U.S.C.

1994)
§

(explaining that a

civil rights

1983 is an "appropriate legal vehicle

to attack unconstitutional .

conditions of confinement").

To

the extent that Castaneda seeks damages for the violation of his
right to receive adequate medical care while in federal custody,
his

claims

concern

the

conditions

of

his

confinement

and are

actionable, if at all, under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of
Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 91 S. Ct. 1999 (1971), which provides
a remedy similar to
actors.
his

§

1983 for constitutional violations by federal

Because Castaneda does not challenge the administration of

sentence

or

seek

speedier

release

from

imprisonment,

Petition fails to state a claim for relief under 28 U.S.C.

§

his
2241

and must be dismissed.
B.

The Civil Rights Claims are Dismissed Without Prejudice

To the extent that Castaneda seeks to assert claims under
Bivens, the respondent argues that all of the complained of actions
occurred at
Texas.

7

FCI-Bastrop,

which

is

in

the

Western District

of

Likewise, the only defendant listed in the pleadings (HSA

Powell) has not been served. 8

Because the underlying claims did

not accrue in this district and none of the parties are located in
this district, Castaneda's civil rights claims were not properly
filed in the Southern District of Texas.

7

Id. at 5.

8

Id.
-4-

See 28 U.S.C.

§

1391(b).

Castaneda has not responded to the Respondent's Motion.
court

expressly advised Castaneda

within the

that

time allowed would result

his

failure

to

The

respond

in the dismissal of

action for want of prosecution under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) . 9

this
By

failing to respond as directed, Castaneda appears to have abandoned
his claims.

Therefore, rather than transfer the case for further

proceedings, the court will dismiss Castaneda's civil rights claims
without prejudice to re-filing them in the appropriate venue as a
complaint under Bivens.
III.

Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows:
1.

The Respondent United States' Motion for Summary
Judgment
or Alternatively Motion
to
Dismiss
Petitioner's Motion for Relief Under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 (Docket Entry No. 11) is GRANTED in part.

2.

The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by
Cirilo Castaneda (Docket Entry No. 1) is DISMISSED
for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241.

3.

Castaneda's civil rights claims for denial of
adequate medical care at FCI-Bastrop are DISMISSED
without prejudice to re-filing in the proper venue.

The Clerk shall provide a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and
Order to the petitioner.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this 28th day

LAKE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9

0rder to Answer, Docket Entry No. 3, p. 3
-5-

~

6.