Ybarra v. Warden, No. 3:2021cv00037 - Document 4 (N.D. Ind. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: The court DENIES the habeas corpus petition pursuant to Section 2254 Habeas Corpus Rule 4; DIRECTS the clerk to enter judgment; DENIES the Petitioner leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal; and DIRECTS the clerk to fax or ema il a copy of this order and the petition (ECF 1 at 1-3) to both the Indiana State Prison Warden and the Indiana Department of Correction. Signed by Chief Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 1/19/2021. (Copy mailed to pro se party and Email to Indiana State Prison and IDOC with Order, Petition, and Clerk's Judgment)(bas)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Ybarra v. Warden Doc. 4 USDC IN/ND case 3:21-cv-00037-JD-MGG document 4 filed 01/19/21 page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION RANDY RUSSELL YBARRA, Petitioner, v. CAUSE NO. 3:21-CV-37-JD-MGG WARDEN, Respondent. OPINION AND ORDER Randy Russell Ybarra, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a habeas corpus petition attempting to challenge a prison disciplinary hearing where a Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO) found him guilty of Battery in violation of Indiana Department of Correction offense B-212 on February 17, 2020. However, the petition says he was not punished with either the loss of Earned Credit Time or a demotion in Credit Class. ECF 1 at 1. A prison disciplinary action can only be challenged in a habeas corpus proceeding where it results in the lengthening of the duration of confinement. Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003). Because the duration of his confinement was not lengthened as a result of this prison disciplinary proceeding, this case must be dismissed. However, before doing so, one other issue needs to be addressed. Ybarra alleges he was moved from segregation to general population on December 3, 2020, and is in Dockets.Justia.com USDC IN/ND case 3:21-cv-00037-JD-MGG document 4 filed 01/19/21 page 2 of 2 danger of being attacked by other inmates. Therefore, a copy of this order and the petition will be sent to the Warden so he can take appropriate action. If Ybarra wants to appeal this decision, he does not need a certificate of appealability because he is challenging a prison disciplinary proceeding. See Evans v. Circuit Court, 569 F.3d 665, 666 (7th Cir. 2009). However, he may not proceed in forma pauperis on appeal because, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1915(a)(3), an appeal in this case could not be taken in good faith. Nevertheless, if he files a notice of appeal, he may ask the United States Court of Appeals for leave to proceed in forma pauperis by filing a motion with the Circuit Court along with a copy of this order demonstrating that he has already been denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis by the District Court. For these reasons, the court: (1) DENIES the habeas corpus petition pursuant to Section 2254 Habeas Corpus Rule 4; (2) DIRECTS the clerk to enter judgment; (3) DENIES the Petitioner leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal; and (4) DIRECTS the clerk to fax or email a copy of this order and the petition (ECF 1 at 1-3) to both the Indiana State Prison Warden and the Indiana Department of Correction. SO ORDERED on January 19, 2021 /s/JON E. DEGUILIO CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
