Williams v. Director TDCJ-CID, No. 1:2009cv00193 - Document 16 (E.D. Tex. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding petitioner's petition. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 12/23/09. (bjc, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION DEWAYNE D. WILLIAMS § VS. § DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09cv193 MEMORANDUM OPINION Petitioner Dewayne D. Williams, proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Factual Allegations Petitioner complains about a prison disciplinary conviction. He states that as a result of the conviction, he lost good conduct time credits. However, an administrative appeal resulted in the conviction being reversed and the good conduct time credits being restored. Petitioner states that despite the reversal, certain property lost as a result of the conviction was not returned to him. Discussion Petitioner filed this case as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The line between claims which may be pursued via a petition for writ of habeas corpus and claims which are cognizable in a civil rights action is a blurry one. A civil rights lawsuit is the appropriate form of action for an inmate who seeks to recover money damages for unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Richardson v. Fleming, 651 F.2d 366 (5th Cir. 1981). In contrast, an inmate who challenges the fact that he is confined must pursue his claim in a petition for writ of habeas corpus. U.S. 475 (1973). Preiser v. Rodriquez, 411 The core issue in determining what type of action a claim must be asserted in is to determine whether the inmate is challenging the fact or duration conditions of his confinement. of his confinement or the Spina v. Aaron, 821 F.2d 126 (5th Cir. 1987). Petitioner state his good conduct time credits were restored following the reversal of his conviction. As a result, a finding in his favor in this lawsuit will have no effect on the fact or duration of his confinement. lost property is a Petitioner s complaint regrading his claim effecting the conditions of his confinement and, a result, may not be pursued in a petition for writ of habeas dismissed. corpus. As a result, this lawsuit will be The dismissal is without prejudice to petitioner s ability to file a civil rights lawsuit concerning his property. 2 Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, this petition for writ of habeas corpus will be dismissed. A final judgment shall be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion. SIGNED this the 23 day of December, 2009. ____________________________ Thad Heartfield United States District Judge 3
]]>
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.
