Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00232/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00232-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

CHARLES CONNORS PLAINTIFF

ADC # 147668 

V. 4:15CV00232 SWW/JTR 

 

EMILY ABBOTT, Little Rock DEFENDANTS

Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, et al. 

 

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

The following Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) has been sent

to United States District Judge Susan Webber Wright. Any party may file written

objections to this Recommendation. Objections must be specific and include the

factual or legal basis for disagreeing with the Recommendation. An objection to a

factual finding must specifically identify the finding of fact believed to be wrong and

describe the evidence that supports that belief. 

An original and one copy of the objections must be received in the office of the

United States District Clerk within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. If no

objections are filed, Judge Wright can adopt this Recommendation without

independently reviewing all of the evidence in the record. By not objecting, you may

also waive any right to appeal questions of fact. 

I. Introduction

Plaintiff, Charles Connors, is a convicted prisoner who is currently housed at

Case 4:15-cv-00232-SWW Document 6 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 3
the Grimes Unit of the Arkansas Department of Corrections (“ADC”). In this pro

se § 1983 Complaint, he requested the Court to recalculate the amount of time that he

has served in the ADC to include the interval time he spent in jail waiting to be

sentenced. Pursuant to the screening function mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the

Court recommends that the case be DISMISSED, without prejudice.

II. Analysis

It is well settled that only challenges to “the circumstances” or “conditions” of

confinement” can be brought in a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983. Challenges like the one made by Plaintiff in this case go “to the fact or

duration of a sentence of imprisonment” and must be brought in a 28 U.S.C. § 2254

habeas action. Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S.749, 750 (2004); Preiser v. Rodriguez,

411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973); Williams v. Hopkins, 130 F.3d 333, 335-36 (8th Cir. 1997). 

Because the Plaintiff is unquestionably challenging the “duration” of his current

sentence in the ADC, he must pursue this claim in a § 2254 habeas action.1

If Plaintiff intends to proceed with this claim, he must first exhaust all available

state court relief before he can properly initiate a § 2254 habeas action in federal

1

When determining what type of claim an inmate has asserted, a court must look

to the nature of the allegations, instead of the label given to the claim by the inmate. 

Kruger v. Erickson, 77 F.3d 1071, 1073 (8th Cir. 1996). 

-2-

Case 4:15-cv-00232-SWW Document 6 Filed 06/24/15 Page 2 of 3
court. 2

IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:

1. Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 2), and his claims be DISMISSED,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

 2. The Court CERTIFY, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in

forma pauperis appeal from any Order adopting this Recommendation would not be

taken in good faith.

Dated this 24th day of June, 2015. 

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

 In order to challenge a sentence calculation by the ADC, a prisoner must file

a “petition for declaratory judgment and petition for writ of mandamus.” The

Arkansas Supreme Court has described this claim as a civil cause of action which

must be filed in circuit court. See Wiggins v.State, 299 Ark. 180, 771 S.W.2d 759

(1989). Furthermore, the “petition . . . is properly filed in the county in which the

defendant, i.e., the Director of the Arkansas Department of Correction or keeper of the

records of the Arkansas Department of Correction, is located.” Id. Based on the

foregoing cases, it appears that Petitioner should file a “petition for declaratory

judgment and writ of mandamus” against Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department

of Correction, in Jefferson County Circuit Court, the county where the Director’s

office is located. Additionally, it would also appear prudent to name as a party

whomever is the ADC “keeper of the records.” If Petitioner is denied relief at the

circuit court level, he must appeal the denial of reliefto the Arkansas Supreme Court.

After having done this, Petitioner will have exhausted his available state court

remedies. He can then properly pursue this claim in a federal habeas action.

-3-

Case 4:15-cv-00232-SWW Document 6 Filed 06/24/15 Page 3 of 3