Opinion
CAUSE NO. 3:07-CV-495 JM.
November 15, 2007
OPINION AND ORDER
John H. Redmond, IV, a pro se prisoner, filed a motion to reconsider this court's dismissal (without prejudice) of his habeas corpus petition because he had not exhausted his claims in state court by fairly presenting them through one complete round of state-court review. In his motion he acknowledges that he has not exhausted his claims in state court and that he has never presented any of them to the Indiana Supreme Court. Citing 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(B)(ii), he argues that the state court process is ineffective because it is too slow and because he is scared to proceed in state court which might result in his transfer back to the Vanderburgh County Jail.
Redmond was convicted on October 16, 2006 when he plead guilty. Since then, he has initiated three proceedings in the state trial court in an effort to obtain relief: a motion for pre-sentence credit filed on August 10, 2007 which he considers deemed denied, a post-conviction relief petition on June 22, 2007 which he subsequently withdrew, and a motion to compel for sentencing orders on June 19, 2007 which was denied. "No constitutional provision or federal law entitles Montgomery to any state collateral review, let alone prompt collateral review." Montgomery v. Meloy, 90 F.3d 1200, 1206 (7th Cir. 1996) (citation omitted).
Though this court understands Redmond's impatience, comity requires that it wait until he has exhausted his claims in state court. Redmond's unwillingness to utilize the state court procedures, and his unwillingness to wait his turn on the state court docket, simply do not make the state's post-conviction procedures ineffective or unavailable to him.
For the foregoing reasons, the Rule 59 motion (DE 6) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.