Glover v. Koenig
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:19-cv-00148
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Glover v. Koenig, Judge Gilliam dismissed Glover’s habeas petition without prejudice for lack of federal habeas jurisdiction and denied a certificate of appealability.
Reginald Glover’s federal habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice, leaving him able to bring the due process claim in a civil-rights action; Craig Koenig’s motion to dismiss was granted.
What happened
Reginald Glover challenged a prison disciplinary finding that caused him to lose time credits, claiming that the disciplinary process violated due process. He asked the court to reverse the finding and restore those credits.
The court held that federal habeas law did not cover this challenge because Glover was serving an indeterminate sentence of 25 years to life. Restoring his credits or removing the disciplinary finding would not necessarily shorten his confinement, because release depended on separate parole decisions. The court therefore did not reach whether the disciplinary proceedings violated due process.
Judge Gilliam granted Craig Koenig’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the petition for lack of federal habeas jurisdiction, without prejudice to Glover bringing the due process claim in a civil-rights action. The court also denied a certificate of appealability, entered judgment, closed the case, and directed the clerk to send Glover a civil-rights complaint form.
The detailed version
- Glover v. Koenig · No. 4:19-cv-00148
- Haywood Gilliam
- Nov. 27, 2019
Background
Reginald Glover, an inmate at Correctional Training Facility–Central, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal law allowing state prisoners to challenge certain custody-related violations. Glover challenged a prison disciplinary finding arising from a March 9, 2016 incident. He alleged that the disciplinary proceedings violated due process, and he sought reversal of the finding and restoration of lost time credits.
Glover had been sentenced in 1992 to an indeterminate term of 25 years to life. Respondent Craig Koenig moved to dismiss the petition for lack of federal habeas jurisdiction. Glover did not file an opposition or otherwise contact the court before the opposition deadline passed.
Jurisdictional ruling
The court explained that federal habeas relief is the exclusive remedy for a prisoner seeking immediate or faster release from confinement. But a challenge to a disciplinary finding is not within federal habeas jurisdiction when success would not necessarily speed the prisoner’s release. For a prisoner serving an indeterminate sentence, restoring time credits does not necessarily shorten confinement because release also depends on parole decisions and other factors.
Applying that rule, the court found that expunging the disciplinary decision and restoring Glover’s lost credits would not necessarily affect the fact or duration of his confinement. The court therefore held that it lacked federal habeas jurisdiction over Glover’s challenge. The court did not decide whether Glover’s due process rights were violated.
Disposition
The court granted Koenig’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the petition for lack of federal habeas jurisdiction without prejudice to Glover bringing his due process claim in a civil-rights action. The court separately denied a certificate of appealability because Glover had not made the required showing. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion, enter judgment, close the file, and send Glover a blank civil-rights complaint form.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.