From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Braddy v. Wilson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jul 30, 2014
580 F. App'x 172 (4th Cir. 2014)

Summary

holding challenge to conditions of confinement was not cognizable in habeas corpus proceeding

Summary of this case from Hallinan v. Scarantino

Opinion

No. 14-6349

07-30-2014

THOMAS MONIQUE BRADDY, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN WILSON, Warden, FCC Petersburg, Respondent - Appellee.

Thomas Monique Braddy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (2:13-cv-00475-RBS-LRL) Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Monique Braddy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Thomas Monique Braddy, Jr., filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition alleging that the conditions of his confinement violate the government's obligations under his plea agreement, pursuant to which he pleaded guilty to bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1349 (2012), aggravated identity theft, 18 U.S.C. § 1028A (2012), and money laundering, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(A)(i), (B)(i) (2012). Braddy appeals the district court's order dismissing the action with prejudice under § 2241 but without prejudice to his right to file an action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

We review de novo a district court's order denying a federal inmate's § 2241 petition. Yi v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 412 F.3d 526, 530 (4th Cir. 2005). Pursuant to § 2241, a prisoner may petition for a writ of habeas corpus if "[h]e is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). Because Braddy's petition alleged constitutional violations regarding only the conditions of his confinement and did not challenge the fact or duration of his sentence, his claims are more properly brought in an action pursuant to Bivens. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 488 (1973) (recognizing habeas as proper remedy for attacking fact or length of confinement); Strader v. Troy, 571 F.2d 1263, 1269 (4th Cir. 1978) (concluding that because petitioner did "not assert that he [was] entitled to parole and should be released," the "claim for relief must be treated as a suit under . . . [42 U.S.C.] § 1983 [(2012)].").

Therefore, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm the district court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED


Summaries of

Braddy v. Wilson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jul 30, 2014
580 F. App'x 172 (4th Cir. 2014)

holding challenge to conditions of confinement was not cognizable in habeas corpus proceeding

Summary of this case from Hallinan v. Scarantino

deciding that when petitioner alleged constitutional violations "regarding only the conditions of his confinement" not the fact or duration of his sentence, his claims were properly brought under Bivens

Summary of this case from Rodriguez v. Ratledge

deciding that when petitioner alleged constitutional violations "regarding only the conditions of his confinement," not the fact or duration of his sentence, his claims were properly brought under Bivens, and not in § 2241 petition

Summary of this case from Neal v. U.S. Penitentiary Lee

deciding that when petitioner alleged constitutional violations "regarding only the conditions of his confinement," not the fact or duration of his sentence, his claims were properly brought under Bivens, and not in § 2241 petition

Summary of this case from Neal v. Streeval

deciding that when petitioner alleged constitutional violations "regarding only the conditions of his confinement" not the fact or duration of his sentence, his claims were properly brought under Bivens

Summary of this case from Stefanski v. Joyner

deciding that when petitioner alleged constitutional violations "regarding only the conditions of his confinement" not the fact or duration of his sentence, his claims were properly brought under Bivens

Summary of this case from Roudabush v. Warden FCI Edgefield

affirming dismissal of habeas petition alleging a condition of confinement claim as improperly brought under Section 2241

Summary of this case from Sandlain v. FCI McDowell Warden

affirming dismissal of habeas petition alleging a condition of confinement claim as improperly brought under Section 2241

Summary of this case from Sandlain v. Warden, FCI McDowell

rejecting a federal inmate's use of § 2241 to raise a claim that his conditions of confinement violated the terms of his plea agreement

Summary of this case from Coreas v. Bounds

dismissing a § 2241 habeas petition alleging a condition of confinement claim as improperly brought under § 2241

Summary of this case from Pepke v. Wilson

dismissing habeas petition alleging a conditions of confinement claims as improperly brought under § 2241

Summary of this case from Lewis v. Hazleton

dismissing a habeas petition alleging a condition of confinement claim as improperly brought under Section 2241

Summary of this case from Sandlain v. Rickard
Case details for

Braddy v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS MONIQUE BRADDY, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN WILSON…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jul 30, 2014

Citations

580 F. App'x 172 (4th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

Pepke v. Wilson

715 Fed.Appx. 261, 265-66 (4th Cir. 2017) ("[C]ourts have generally held that a § 1983 suit or a Bivens…

Neal v. U.S. Penitentiary Lee

On the other hand, courts generally agree that an inmate's challenges to the conditions of his confinement…