Cilek v. Warden Davies, No. 2:2017cv00104 - Document 3 (N.D. Ind. 2017)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: The Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The clerk is DIRECTED to close the case. ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 3/8/17. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(jld)

Download PDF
Cilek v. Warden Davies Doc. 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION ANTHONY WAYNE CILEK, Petitioner, vs. WARDEN DAVIES, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 2:17-CV-104 OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Petition under 28 U.S.C. Paragraph 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Anthony Wayne Cilek, a pro se prisoner, on March 6, 2017. For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES the habeas corpus petition WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The clerk is DIRECTED to close this case. DISCUSSION Cilek is being held in the Lake County Jail as a pre-trial detainee. He is asking to be released and presumably to have the charges against him dismissed. “Ordinarily the attempt of a state prisoner to obtain federal habeas corpus relief in advance of his state criminal trial [is] completely hopeless.” United States ex rel. Stevens v. Circuit Court of Milwaukee County, 675 F.2d 946, 947 (7th Cir. 1982). This is one of those ordinary cases. Though the circuit in Stevens provided for a narrow exception to entertain some double jeopardy claims, this case does not present a double jeopardy claim. Here, Cilek argues that he was arrested in violation of the Fourth Amendment. This is a question to be resolved in the first instance by the State trial court or the State Appellate Courts – not this Court. Thus, to the extent that Cilek believes that he has a viable defense to the charges against him, he needs to first present those claims to the State courts – at trial, on appeal, and ultimately to the Indiana Supreme Court. See Lewis v. Sternes, 390 F.3d 1019, 1025-1026 (7th Cir. 2004). Therefore this petition will be dismissed without prejudice. Then, after he has presented his claims to the Indiana Supreme Court, he may return to this Court and file another habeas corpus petition challenging the conviction, if necessary. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Court DENIES the habeas corpus petition WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The clerk is DIRECTED to close this case. DATED: March 8, 2017 /s/RUDY LOZANO, Judge United States District Court 2
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.