Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02039/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02039-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff/Respondent, 

vs.

Jeanette B. Wilcher, 

Defendant/Movant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 08-2039-PHX-EHC

ORDER

Movant filed a Motion to be Released from Federal Prison Pending Final Disposition.

(Dkt. 10.) Respondent filed a Response. (Dkt. 11.) Movant did not file a reply.

On May 8, 2009, Magistrate Judge Lawrence Anderson filed a Report and

Recommendation. (Dkt. 12.) On May 18, 2009, Movant filed a Notice to the Court, which

the Court will construe as an Objection to the Report and Recommendation. (Dkt. 14.) 

I. Standard of Review

A district court judge reviews de novo the portions of the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation to which Petitioner has filed an objection. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

The district court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge. Id. 

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:08-cv-02039-EHC Document 15 Filed 06/15/09 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 (Dkt. 1) and the Magistrate Judge’s April 30, 2009 Report and Recommendation

(Dkt. 9) remain pending before the Court. 

- 2 -

II. Discussion

Movant requests to be released from federal prison pending final disposition of her

habeas petition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.1

 (Dkt. 10.) Respondent opposes Movant’s

request. (Dkt. 11.) The Magistrate Judge recommends denying Movant’s Motion to be

Released from Federal Prison because Movant fails to establish that she is likely to prevail

on the merits of her case and does not establish that “special circumstances” exist. (Dkt. 12.)

Movant contends that she “demonstrated the existence of [s]pecial [c]ircumstances

([her] failing health) and the probability of success in [her] [§] 2255 motion.” (Dkt. 14 at 2.)

Movant does not provide any support for these contentions. Movant again fails to

demonstrate a likelihood of success on her habeas petition. In fact, the Magistrate Judge’s

April 30, 2009 Report and Recommendation recommends denying Movant’s habeas petition.

(Dkt. 9.) Movant also fails to provide any evidence supporting her contention that her failing

health creates a special circumstance for release. 

Movant also claims that she has not received proper medical care in violation of her

constitutional rights. (See Dkt. 14 at 1.) The proper proceeding in which to challenge the

conditions of a prisoner’s confinement is a civil rights action, not a habeas corpus petition.

Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475,

484 & 498-99 (1973)). Therefore, the Court does not address this claim.

The Court, having reviewed the record de novo, adopts in full the Report and

Recommendation and incorporates the same as a part of this Order.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge

filed May 8, 2009 (Dkt. 12).

Case 2:08-cv-02039-EHC Document 15 Filed 06/15/09 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 3 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Movant’s Motion to be Released from

Federal Prison Pending Final Disposition (Dkt. 10).

DATED this 12th day of June, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-02039-EHC Document 15 Filed 06/15/09 Page 3 of 3