Roger Len Ervin v. Arnold Hopkins, Commissioner of Corrections Ralph Packard, Warden

Fourth Circuit

Roger Len Ervin v. Arnold Hopkins, Commissioner of Corrections Ralph Packard, Warden

829 F.2d 35, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 11542, 1987 WL 44705

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedAugust 31, 1987

Docket87-6083

StatusUnpublished

This text of 829 F.2d 35 (Roger Len Ervin v. Arnold Hopkins, Commissioner of Corrections Ralph Packard, Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Roger Len Ervin v. Arnold Hopkins, Commissioner of Corrections Ralph Packard, Warden, 829 F.2d 35, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 11542, 1987 WL 44705 (4th Cir. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

829 F.2d 35
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Roger Len ERVIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Arnold HOPKINS, Commissioner of Corrections; Ralph Packard,
Warden, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 87-6083

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 18, 1987.
Decided August 31, 1987.

Roger Len Ervin, appellant pro se.

Before K.K. HALL, WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Roger Len Ervin, presently confined at the Maryland House of Correction, filed suit under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, seeking two million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages on a claim of excessive imprisonment. The district court found that the core of Ervin's claim sounded in habeas and that exhaustion of state remedies was required. The district court dismissed Ervin's Sec. 1983 complaint and directed that the clerk send him the forms necessary to file a habeas corpus petition; these forms call for information from the petitioner on whether he has fully presented his claims to the state courts.

We agree with the district court that Ervin's claims challenge the length of his confinement and thus may not be pursued in federal court prior to exhaustion of state remedies. See Todd v. Baskerville, 712 F.2d 70 (4th Cir. 1983); Hamlin v. Warren, 664 F.2d 29 (4th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 911 (1982). We remand the case to the district court, however, for modification of the judgment to reflect that the dismissal was without prejudice. Because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the judgment as modified.

REMANDED AND AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

829 F.2d 35
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Roger Len ERVIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Arnold HOPKINS, Commissioner of Corrections; Ralph Packard,
Warden, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 87-6083

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 18, 1987.
Decided August 31, 1987.

Roger Len Ervin, appellant pro se.

Before K.K. HALL, WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Roger Len Ervin, presently confined at the Maryland House of Correction, filed suit under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, seeking two million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages on a claim of excessive imprisonment. The district court found that the core of Ervin's claim sounded in habeas and that exhaustion of state remedies was required. The district court dismissed Ervin's Sec. 1983 complaint and directed that the clerk send him the forms necessary to file a habeas corpus petition; these forms call for information from the petitioner on whether he has fully presented his claims to the state courts.

We agree with the district court that Ervin's claims challenge the length of his confinement and thus may not be pursued in federal court prior to exhaustion of state remedies. See Todd v. Baskerville, 712 F.2d 70 (4th Cir. 1983); Hamlin v. Warren, 664 F.2d 29 (4th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 911 (1982). We remand the case to the district court, however, for modification of the judgment to reflect that the dismissal was without prejudice. Because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the judgment as modified.

REMANDED AND AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

829 F.2d 35, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 11542, 1987 WL 44705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roger-len-ervin-v-arnold-hopkins-commissioner-of-c-ca4-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack