Opinion
No. 3:02cv0233 AS
September 16, 2002
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On July 11, 2002, pro se petitioner, Donald C. Thornton, filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Response filed on behalf of the respondent by the Attorney General of Indiana on August 21, 2002, demonstrates the necessary compliance with Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir. 1982). The petitioner filed a Traverse on September 3, 2002, which this Court has carefully examined.
This is not the classic case brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. It is not a prisoner disciplinary case invoking Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974). Neither is it a case challenging a state court criminal conviction on constitutional grounds. Rather, it is an attempt to use 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to challenge the revocation of parole in a state court. It also needs to be remembered that 28 U.S.C. § 2254 cannot be used solely to raise questions regarding state law. See Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (1991). See also Pennhurst v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984). The issue raised here is a state law issue which would fall within the teaching of Estelle. There are also state remedies that should be exhausted under Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509 (1982).
It is also worthy of note that at this time, this petitioner is not in the custody of the Indiana Department of Corrections, but is in the custody of the Sheriff of Allen County, Indiana, being incarcerated in the Allen County Jail in Fort Wayne, Indiana. It is also apparent that there are ongoing processes in the State of Indiana and its judiciary which should not be interfered with by this federal court. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). This Court is well aware of the Supreme Court decision of Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972), but this Court is not yet required to reach any questions under Morrissey until the state proceedings have been completed.
For all of these reasons, the petition is now DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.