Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Executive Director of Colorado Department of Corrections

United States District Court, D. Colorado

March 1, 2016

SHANE EDWARD JOHNSON, Applicant,
v.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, and WARDEN OF LIMON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Respondents.

ORDER DIRECTING APPLICANT TO CURE DEFICIENCIES

Gordon P. Gallagher United States Magistrate Judge

Applicant, Shane Edward Johnson, who is a state prisoner, has filed an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1). Mr. Johnson claims that he was deprived of due process in connection with an administrative segregation hearing, that his placement in administrative segregation for approximately four years violated due process, and that he was not allowed to accrue earn and good time credits while in administrative segregation. He further asserts a denial of his equal protection rights. Mr. Johnson claims that he is entitled to12 days of earned credits and 15 days of good time credits for the 52 months that “he was illegally confined to Ag Seg.” (ECF No. 1 at 27). He also requests monetary damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

To the extent Mr. Johnson is challenging his conditions of confinement in administrative segregation and seeks monetary relief, his due process and equal protection claims must be asserted in a Prisoner Complaint as civil rights claims, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Standifer v. Ledezma, 653 F.3d 1276, 1280 (10th Cir. 2011). However, to the extent Mr. Johnson challenges the duration of his confinement, he may assert his constitutional claims in an Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973) (“The essence of habeas corpus is an attack by a person in custody upon the legality of that custody, and . . . the traditional function of the writ is to secure release from illegal custody.”); see also Palma-Salazar v. Davis, 677 F.3d 1031, 1035 (10th Cir. 2012) (discussing distinction between habeas corpus claims pursuant to § 2241 and conditions of confinement claims raised in civil rights actions). If Mr. Johnson intends to pursue both civil rights claims and habeas corpus claims, he will be required to pursue those claims in separate actions.

As part of the Court’s review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(b), the Court has determined that the submitted documents are deficient as described in this Order. Mr. Johnson will be directed to cure the following if he wishes to pursue his claims. Any papers that Mr. Johnson files in response to this Order must include the civil action number noted above in the caption of this Order.

28 U.S.C. § 1915 Motion and Affidavit:

(1) X is not submitted

(2) __is missing affidavit

(3) X is missing certified copy of prisoner's trust fund statement for the 6-month period immediately preceding this filing (if filing a civil rights complaint)

(4) X is missing certificate showing current balance in prison account (if filing a habeas corpus application)

(5) __is missing required financial information

(6) __is missing an original signature by the prisoner

(7) __is not on proper form

(8) __names in caption do not match names in caption of complaint, petition ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.