DUVALL v. WARDEN

• Court: District Court, S.D. Indiana
• Decided: January 10, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00102
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

TAMI LAINE DUVALL, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 2:24-cv-00102-JPH-MG ) WARDEN, ) ) Respondent. )

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT Tami Duvall's petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeks relief from her conviction in disciplinary case RTC 23-05-0308. Dkt. 1. Respondent moves for an extension of time to respond to the Order to Show Cause and to dismiss the petition. Dkts. 8, 9. Ms. Duvall moves for court assistance. Dkt. 11. The Court addresses each below, separately. I. Motion for an Extension of Time As a preliminary matter, Respondent's motion for an extension of time, dkt. [8], is granted. Respondent's motion to dismiss is accepted as timely. II. Motion to Dismiss Respondent moves to dismiss the petition as moot because "the Indiana Department of Correction dismissed the case, removed the charges, reversed the sanction, and restored the lost time." Dkt. 9 at 1; see dkt. 9-1. Ms. Duvall filed no response, and the time to do so has passed. "[I]n all habeas corpus proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the successful petitioner must demonstrate that he 'is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.'" Brown v. Watters, 599 F.3d 602, 611 (7th Cir. 2010) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a)). To be considered "in custody" for purposes of a challenge to a prison disciplinary conviction, the petitioner must have been deprived of good-time credits, Cochran v. Buss, 381 F.3d 637, 639 (7th Cir. 2004) (per curiam), or of credit-earning class, Montgomery v. Anderson, 262 F.3d 641, 644-45 (7th Cir. 2001). A case becomes moot, and the federal courts lose subject matter jurisdiction, when a justiciable controversy ceases to exist between the parties. See Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U.S. 9, 12 (1992) ("if an event occurs while a case is pending . . . that makes it impossible for the court to grant 'any effectual relief whatever' to a prevailing party, the [case] must be dismissed") (quoting Mills v. Green, 159 U.S. 651, 653 (1895)); Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 317 (1988) (grounding mootness doctrine in the Constitution's Article III requirement that courts adjudicate only "actual, ongoing cases or controversies"). "A case is moot when issues presented are no longer 'live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome." Erie v. Pap's A.M., 529 U.S. 277, 287 (2000) (internal citations omitted). This action is moot because Ms. Duvall's petition no longer challenges a disciplinary action that affects the fact or duration of her custody. The case must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Board of Educ. of Downers Grove Grade Sch. Dist. No. 58 v. Steven L., 89 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1198 (1997). When it is determined that a court lacks jurisdiction, its only course of action is to announce that fact and dismiss the case. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 94 (1998) ("'Jurisdiction is power to declare the law, and when it ceases to exist, the only function remaining to the court is that of announcing the fact and dismissing the cause.'") (quoting Ex parte McCardle, 7 Wall. 506, 514, 19 L.Ed. 264 (1868)). Accordingly, Respondent's motion to dismiss, dkt. [9], is granted. III. Motion for Court Assistance Ms. Duvall has filed a motion for court assistance. Dkt. 11. In the motion, she alleges her legal materials were confiscated and states she that "[a]s well as informing [the Court] of this problem, [she is] also asking for any advice or suggestion [the Court] may have." Id. at 2. The motion, dkt. [11], is denied. The Court cannot provide legal advice to Ms. Duvall. IV. Summary In sum, Respondent's motion for an extension of time, dkt. [8], and motion to dismiss, dkt. [9], are granted. Ms. Duvall's motion for court assistance, dkt. [11], is denied. This action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The clerk is directed to enter final judgment consistent with this Entry. SO ORDERED. Date: 1/9/2025 ard Pat tambon James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana

Distribution: TAMI LAINE DUVALL 215966 INDIANA WOMENS PRISON INDIANA WOMENS PRISON Inmate Mail/Parcels 727 Moon Road Plainfield, IN 46168 All electronically registered counsel