Stevens v. Naples City Justice, No. 2:2018cv00392 - Document 4 (D. Utah 2018)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Petitioner is directed to respond in writing within 30 days from the date of this Order and inform the Court why the Petition should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of the case. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 10/5/2018. (eat)
Download PDF
Stevens v. Naples City Justice Doc. 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH DALE NOLEN STEVENS, Petitioner, MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED v. Case No. 2:18-CV-392 DAK NAPLES CITY JUSTICE COURT et al., Respondents. Judge Dale A. Kimball Citing violations of the Federal Constitution, Petitioner Dale Nolen Stevens attacks his conviction on a traffic violation in Utah justice court. 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 (2018). His punishment was a fine. Federal statute requires that a petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus be “in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court . . . in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254(a) (2018). A petitioner thus must show that he is in custody; the requirement is jurisdictional. Mays v. Dinwiddie, 580 F.l3d1136, 1139 (10th Cir. 2009). Proper construction of “custody” under the statute is a legal question. Id. at 1138. Not every restriction regarding federal rights warrants a habeas-corpus remedy. Lehman v. Lycoming County Children’s Servs. Agency, 458 U.S. 502, 510 (1982). So, collateral consequences of conviction that have only a negligible effect on liberty or movement do not satisfy the “custody” requirement. Virsnieks v. Smith, 521 F.3d 707, 718 (7th Cir. 2008). For example, fines imposed on a petitioner do not satisfy it; there must instead be a significant restraint of liberty. Erlandson v. Northglenn Mun. Ct., 528 F.3d 785, 788 (10th Cir. 2008). Dockets.Justia.com IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner must within thirty days SHOW CAUSE why the Petition should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DATED this 5th day of October, 2018. BY THE COURT: __________________________________ JUDGE DALE A. KIMBALL United States District Court 2