Hernandez v. Zickefoose

Full title: ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. G. ZICKEFOOSE, Respondent.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Date published: Jun 10, 2014

CASE NO. 4:14 CV 262 (N.D. Ohio Jun. 10, 2014)

Opinion

CASE NO. 4:14 CV 262

06-10-2014

ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. G. ZICKEFOOSE, Respondent.

DAN AARON POLSTER

JUDGE DAN AARON POLSTER

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION

AND ORDER

On February 7, 2014, petitioner pro se Alejandro Hernandez, a federal prisoner at the Northeast Ohio Correctional Center ("NEOCC"), filed the above-captioned habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner asserts violation of his rights under the First, Fourth and Eighth Amendments because he was unable to obtain candles at NEOCC for religious purposes.

Habeas corpus is not the appropriate vehicle to do challenge the conditions of confinement. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 498-99 (1973); Luedtke v. Berkebile, 704. F.3d 465 (6^th Cir. 2013). To assert constitutional claims regarding those conditions, petitioner would need to file a civil rights action.¹

1 To file a civil rights action, petitioner would have to file a complaint in a new case and either pay the $400 filing fee or file a prisoner account statement with sufficient sufficient financial information for the court to assess and collect the filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

Accordingly, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243. The court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________

DAN AARON POLSTER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE