TSETSE v. KNIGHT

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana
DecidedJune 1, 2020
Docket1:20-cv-00161
StatusUnknown

This text of TSETSE v. KNIGHT (TSETSE v. KNIGHT) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Indiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
TSETSE v. KNIGHT, (S.D. Ind. 2020).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION CHRIST A. TSETSE, ) Petitioner, Vv. No. 1:20-cv-00161-JPH-DML WENDY KNIGHT, Respondent. ENTRY DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT In a prison disciplinary proceeding identified as No. CIC 19-10-0015, the petitioner was found guilty of violating prison rules. In her motion to dismiss, the respondent reports that the only sanction that could have affected the duration of the petitioner’s custody, the suspended 60-day loss of earned credit time, was never enforced and the sanction has expired. See dkt. 12. A federal court may issue a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) only if it finds the applicant “‘is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” Id. Because the petitioner is not “in custody” based on the sanctions imposed in the challenged disciplinary hearing, the habeas action is moot. See Eichwedel v. Curry, 700 F.3d 275, 279 (7th Cir. 2012). A moot case must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Home Care Providers, Inc. v. Hemmelgarn, 861 F.3d 615, 620 (7th Cir. 2017). Accordingly, for the above reasons, the respondent’s unopposed motion to dismiss this action as moot, dkt. [11], is GRANTED. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. SO ORDERED. Date: 6/1/2020 wend Pata; 4 James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge 1 Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:

CHRIST A. TSETSE 966972 PENDLETON - CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY Inmate Mail/Parcels 5124 West Reformatory Road PENDLETON, IN 46064

Abigail Recker INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL abigail.recker@atg.in.gov

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

Related

Paul Eichwedel v. Nedra Chandler
700 F.3d 275 (Seventh Circuit, 2012)
Nightingale Home Healthcare v. United States
861 F.3d 615 (Seventh Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
TSETSE v. KNIGHT, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tsetse-v-knight-insd-2020.