Opinion
No. 3:07 CV 500.
October 17, 2007
OPINION AND ORDER
Eric D. Smith, a pro se prisoner, filed this habeas corpus petition attempting to challenge his written reprimand imposed on June 27, 2007 by the Westville Disciplinary Hearing Board (DHB) in case number WCU 07-06-0502. (DE # 1.) However, a prison disciplinary action can only be challenged in a habeas corpus proceeding where it results in the lengthening of the duration of confinement. Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003). The particular written reprimand challenged by Smith in this case did not lengthen the duration of his confinement ( see DE # 1 at 1), therefore these claims are not actionable in a habeas corpus proceeding.
RULE 4 of the RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2254 CASES IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS explains that:
[i]f it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court, the judge must dismiss the petition and direct the clerk to notify the petitioner.
Here, the petition does not present any basis for habeas corpus relief, therefore it must be denied. For the foregoing reasons, this habeas corpus petition is DENIED.