From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNeil v. Garrett

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Dec 19, 2024
2:24-CV-00124-BSM (E.D. Ark. Dec. 19, 2024)

Opinion

2:24-CV-00124-BSM

12-19-2024

MARIO MCNEIL Reg. #30893-076 PETITIONER v. CHAD GARRETT Warden, Forrest City Low RESPONDENT


ORDER

After de novo review of the record, United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe's recommended disposition [Doc. No. 8] is adopted for the reasons set forth therein. Furthermore, despite Mario McNeil's assertion in a post-recommended disposition response that exhaustion would have been futile, see Doc. No. 9, McNeil fails to demonstrate how his proper use of the prison's grievance procedures would have left him remediless. See Doc. No. 8 at 4 (showing how McNeil “refused to proceed as instructed”); see also Ex Parte Hawk, 321 U.S. 114, 118 (1944) (exhaustion only futile where no remedy is afforded or the remedy afforded proves in practice unavailable or seriously inadequate). Chad Garrett's motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 6] is therefore granted and McNeil's section 2241 petition for a writ of habeas corpus [Doc. No. 1] is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED


Summaries of

McNeil v. Garrett

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Dec 19, 2024
2:24-CV-00124-BSM (E.D. Ark. Dec. 19, 2024)
Case details for

McNeil v. Garrett

Case Details

Full title:MARIO MCNEIL Reg. #30893-076 PETITIONER v. CHAD GARRETT Warden, Forrest…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas

Date published: Dec 19, 2024

Citations

2:24-CV-00124-BSM (E.D. Ark. Dec. 19, 2024)