Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-6_24-cv-06088/USCOURTS-arwd-6_24-cv-06088-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

HOT SPRINGS DIVISION 

SHERREL JEAN COURVELLE PETITIONER 

v. No. 6:24-cv-06088 

MIKE MCCORMICK

Sheriff of Garland County, Arkansas RESPONDENT 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

Sherrel Jean Courvelle (“Courvelle”) filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus on June 

27, 2024. ECF No. 1. The following day, the Court ordered Courvelle to file an Amended Petition 

on the Court’s approved form. ECF No. 3. On July 11, 2024, Courvelle filed an Amended Petition 

under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. ECF No. 4. 1 

On September 26, 2024, Sheriff Mike McCormick, (“Respondent”) filed a Response to the 

Amended Petition. ECF No. 15. The matter is now ripe for consideration. This Amended Petition 

was referred for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of 

the case. The Court has reviewed the Amended Petition, Response, and all exhibits submitted and 

finds the Petition should be DENIED. 

I. BACKGROUND

The State of Arkansas charged Courvelle with numerous felony offenses including nine 

counts of aggravated cruelty to a dog, cat or equine, theft of property valued between $1,000 and 

$4999, theft of property over $5,000, and three counts of failure to appear. The Garland County 

Sheriff was ordered to arrest Courvelle and hold her with a zero bond by a failure to appear warrant 

issued by the Garland County Circuit Court on August 24, 2023. ECF No. 15-1. Courvelle was 

1

 A review of the Amended Petition shows Courvelle is asking to be released from the Garland County Detention 

Center and have her charges dismissed. Accordingly, the Court considers the Amended Petition as one filed 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Case 6:24-cv-06088-SOH Document 19 Filed 10/30/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:

<pageID>
2 

arrested on February 24, 2024. Courvelle was tried by a jury on September 23, 2024, in the Garland 

County Circuit Court and convicted of three counts of failure to appear. She was sentenced to 

forty-five years in the Arkansas Department of Corrections.2 

 Courvelle’s Amended Petition, which incorporates her original Petition, contains more 

than seventy pages, much of which is indecipherable. She asserts the State of Arkansas has no 

jurisdiction over her based on a variety of sovereign citizen and common law arguments. ECF 

Nos. 1, 4. Courvelle describes four specific grounds for relief in the Amended Petition: 1) denial 

of a speedy trial; 2) double jeopardy based on her claims she had “a common law trial by jury 

verdict and the Foreign Courts operating a foreign law on our land refuse to acknowledge the 

verdict...”; 3) “The police trespassed and searched on my property repeatedly w/no warrant”...; 

and 4) “I have been arrested multiple times over the same offense...”. ECF No. 4, pp. 6-7. 

Respondent argues: 1) the Circuit Courts are the courts of general original jurisdiction in 

Arkansas pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. 16-13-201, venue was proper, and the courts had both 

personal and subject matter jurisdiction of Courvelle’s criminal case; 2) Courvelle’s allegations 

concerning double jeopardy and speedy trial are without merit; 3) and Courvelle failed to exhaust 

state remedies, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b)(1)(A). ECF No. 15, p. 3. 

II. DISCUSSION 

Under the plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b), Courvelle’s Amended Petition cannot be 

granted “unless it appears that—(A) the applicant has exhausted the remedies available in the 

courts of the State; or (B) (i) there is an absence of available State corrective process; or (ii) 

circumstances exist that render such process ineffective to protect the rights of the applicant.” 

Further, Section 2254 (c) states: “An applicant shall not be deemed to have exhausted the remedies 

2

 The docket in Courvelle’s criminal case 26CR-23-712 is located at https://caseinfo.arcourts.gov/opad/case/26CR23-712 (accessed October 28, 2024). 

Case 6:24-cv-06088-SOH Document 19 Filed 10/30/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:

<pageID>
3 

available in the courts of the State, within the meaning of this section, if he has the right under the 

law of the State to raise, by any available procedure, the question presented. 

The state court criminal docket indicates Courvelle filed a “Notice of Appeal” on October 

10, 2024, and requested a trial transcript. Clearly Courvelle has not availed herself of all available 

state court procedures. Further, there has been no demonstration of the absence of an available 

State corrective process or any other circumstance which would render the process ineffective to 

protect Courvelle’s rights. Accordingly, the § 2254 Petition should be dismissed for failure to 

exhaust available state remedies. 

III. CONCLUSION 

 Based on the foregoing, IT IS RECOMMENDED the Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

(ECF No. 4) be DISMISSED without prejudice. 

 The Parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of this Report and Recommendation 

in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely 

objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The Parties are 

reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the 

district court. See Thompson v. Nix, 897 F.2d 356, 357 (8th Cir. 1990). 

DATED this 30th day of October 2024.

 /s/ Barry A. Bryant 

 HON. BARRY A. BRYANT 

 U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 6:24-cv-06088-SOH Document 19 Filed 10/30/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:

<pageID>