Caldwell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Background

Kerry G. Caldwell, who is incarcerated at FCI Otisville, alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights by denying him access to his tablet, visitation privileges, and 41 days of Good Conduct Time. He sought money damages and an order requiring the Bureau of Prisons to restore the 41 days. Although Caldwell cited 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the court explained that claims for damages against federal employees arise under Bivens, the federal counterpart to suits against state officials under Section 1983.

Court’s analysis

The court stated that a damages claim challenging the loss of good-time credits is barred when success would necessarily call the validity of the prison disciplinary proceeding into question, unless that proceeding or the resulting loss has already been invalidated. Caldwell did not allege that the disciplinary hearing leading to the loss of credits had been invalidated. The court therefore stayed the damages claims arising from the loss of the credits until the challenge to those credits is resolved. The court expressly did not decide at this stage whether a Bivens damages claim is available for Caldwell’s procedural due-process claims.

The court also explained that a challenge to the execution of a federal sentence—including loss of good-time credits through prison discipline—must be brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal petition used to challenge how a sentence is carried out. It construed Caldwell’s complaint as including a request for that relief. Under the governing procedure, however, the court had to give Caldwell notice and an opportunity to reject that characterization before proceeding with the § 2241 claim.

Order and effect

The court construed the complaint as including a § 2241 claim and gave Caldwell 30 days from the date of the order to notify the court in writing if he wanted to withdraw it. If he did not respond, the court would proceed on that basis. If he withdrew the claim and pursued damages only for the tablet and visitation denials, the court stated that he would likely give up any later challenge to the loss of Good Conduct Time. No answer was due at that time.

Judge Nelson S. Roman also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because Caldwell had not then made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fees.