Opinion
CASE NO. 1:18 CV 2963
04-29-2019
ANTONIO D. STEWART, Petitioner, v. WARDEN ERIC IVEY, et al., Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner, a detainee in the Cuyahoga County Jail, has filed a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. No. 1.) In his petition, he seeks compensation on the basis of alleged inhumane conditions in the Jail.
However, a § 2241 habeas corpus petition is not the appropriate vehicle for a prisoner to challenge the conditions of his confinement, as the petitioner does here. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 498-99 (1973); Sullivan v. United States, 90 F. App'x 862, 863 (6th Cir. 2004) ("[Section] 2241 is a vehicle not for challenging prison conditions, but for challenging matters concerning the execution of a sentence such as the computation of good-time credits."). In order to seek relief concerning the conditions of his confinement, the petitioner must file a civil rights action.
To bring a civil rights action, the petitioner would have to file a civil rights complaint in a new case, and either pay the $400 filing fee, or an application to proceed in forma pauperis accompanied by a certified prisoner account statement, in order for the court to assess and collect the appropriate fee. See 28 U.S.C. §1915(b)(1). --------
Accordingly, petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is granted, and this action for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed without prejudice pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2243. The Court further certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith and there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
S/John R. Adams
JOHN R. ADAMS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: 4/29/19