Block v. Williams

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

RICHARD BLOCK PLAINTIFF ADC #130743

V. No. 3:25-cv-68-DPM

CODY M. WILLIAMS, Sergeant, North Central Unit DEFENDANT

ORDER Unopposed recommendation, Doc. 4, adopted as modified. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (1983 addition to advisory committee notes). Here’s the modification. The Court does not hold that Block’s due process claim is Heck-barred. It would be barred if the loss of good time credits had the effect of lengthening Block’s sentence. Sheldon v. Hundley, 83 F.3d 231, 233 (8th Cir. 1996). But it doesn’t; the loss of good time only affects his transfer eligibility date. Ark. Code Ann. § 12-29-201(d); McKinnon v. Norris, 366 Ark. 404, 408, 231 S.W.3d 725, 730 (2006)." In any event, Block failed to state a claim because he doesn’t

* The Court notes two older Court of Appeals decisions that come out the other way, but are not precedent given their dates and designations as unpublished. Eighth Cir. R. 32.1A; Johnson v. Reed, 162 F.3d 1164 (8th Cir. 1998) (per curiam); Early v. Blankenship, 221 F.3d 1342 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam).

have a liberty interest in his prisoner classification. Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78, 88 n.9 (1976). Strike recommended. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Any in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). So Ordered. MP VWantoll p- D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 1 a0as

~2-