Opinion
2:24-cv-125-DPM
08-05-2024
ABRAHAM GRANT ADC #128147 PLAINTIFF v. E. DION WILSON, Circuit Judge, Phillips County DEFENDANT
ORDER
D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge
Grant has paid the filing fee, and this Court must screen his pro se complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Grant is serving a life sentence for capital murder. In January 2023, he petitioned the Phillips County Circuit Court to correct what Grant believes is an illegal sentence. Doc. 2 at 11-15. In October 2023, that Court (Judge Wilson presiding) granted his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Grant now sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Judge Wilson's delay in addressing the merits of his petition violates his constitutional rights. Doc. 2. Grant seeks an order requiring Judge Wilson to act.
This Court cannot provide the ultimate relief Grant seeks in this § 1983 case. To challenge the validity of his state criminal sentence, Grant must do so either in state post-conviction proceedings or, after exhausting those remedies, through a petition for federal habeas review. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). Accepting the pleaded facts as true, Grant's dissatisfaction with Judge Wilson's speed in addressing his pending state petition does not state a constitutional claim. This Court does not superintend Judge Wilson's docket. The circumstances do not show a due process violation; litigation takes time. Grant's complaint is therefore dismissed without prejudice. The Court recommends that this dismissal count as a "strike" for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). An in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
SO ORDERED.