SEIVER v. WALTON, 13-cv-928-CJP. (2014)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20141121c30
Visitors: 16
Filed: Nov. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2014
Summary: ORDER CLIFFORD J. PROUD, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the Court on petitioner's Motion for Expedited Consideration Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1657. (Doc. 18). In his 28 U.S.C. 2241 petition, Mr. Seiver challenges the validity of prison disciplinary proceedings resulting in the loss of 26 days of good conduct credit. Petitioner is serving a 420-month sentence for possession of child pornography and sexual exploitation of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2252A(A)(5) & (B)(2) and 18
Summary: ORDER CLIFFORD J. PROUD, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the Court on petitioner's Motion for Expedited Consideration Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1657. (Doc. 18). In his 28 U.S.C. 2241 petition, Mr. Seiver challenges the validity of prison disciplinary proceedings resulting in the loss of 26 days of good conduct credit. Petitioner is serving a 420-month sentence for possession of child pornography and sexual exploitation of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2252A(A)(5) & (B)(2) and 18 ..
More
ORDER
CLIFFORD J. PROUD, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on petitioner's Motion for Expedited Consideration Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1657. (Doc. 18).
In his 28 U.S.C. §2241 petition, Mr. Seiver challenges the validity of prison disciplinary proceedings resulting in the loss of 26 days of good conduct credit. Petitioner is serving a 420-month sentence for possession of child pornography and sexual exploitation of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2252A(A)(5) & (B)(2) and 18 U.S.C. §2251(A) & (E). His projected release date is March 14, 2041. See, Doc. 12, p. 1.
Laying aside the question of whether the statute cited by petitioner even applies here, the Court concludes that petitioner has not shown good cause for expedited consideration of his case. This case will be handled in the ordinary course of business.
Petitioner's Motion for Expedited Consideration Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1657 (Doc. 18) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
