Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_19-cv-00022/USCOURTS-ared-5_19-cv-00022-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

PINE BLUFF DIVISION

CHARLES EDWARD JONES, SR PETITIONER

ADC # 144544

V. CASE NO. 5:19-CV-22-KGB-BD

WENDY KELLEY, Director

Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

I. Procedure for Filing Objections:

This Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) has been sent to Judge 

Kristine G. Baker. Mr. Jones may file written objections with the Clerk of Court. To be 

considered, objections must be filed within 14 days. Objections should be specific and 

should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. 

If Mr. Jones does not file objections, he risks waiving the right to appeal questions 

of fact. And, if no objections are filed, Judge Baker can adopt this Recommendation 

without independently reviewing the record.

II. Discussion:

On January 18, 2019, Petitioner Charles Jones Sr., an inmate in the Arkansas 

Department of Correction (“ADC”), filed what was docketed as a new pro se federal 

petition for a writ of habeas corpus and motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docket 

entries #1 and #2) A case number was assigned, and the pleadings were docketed as a 

request for federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Case 5:19-cv-00022-KGB Document 9 Filed 01/29/19 Page 1 of 2
Mr. Jones has now filed a Motion to Amend/Correct a Clerical Error. (#5) He 

explains that he did not intend to file a federal habeas corpus petition, but rather, intended 

the documents to be filed as exhibits in an existing §1983 case currently pending before 

Judge Billy Roy Wilson, No. 5:18-CV-192-BRW. In short, Mr. Jones did not intend to 

file a new federal habeas action or request to proceed in forma pauperis. Instead, he 

simply intended to “add to discovery for the plaintiff’s exhibits.” (#5) His motion is 

bolstered by the fact that both the habeas corpus petition and the IFP application are 

styled as pleadings in the Supreme Court of Arkansas.

III. Conclusion:

The Court recommends that Mr. Jones’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (#1) 

be DENIED, as moot and that the Clerk be directed to close this case. 

DATED this 29th day of January, 2019.

___________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:19-cv-00022-KGB Document 9 Filed 01/29/19 Page 2 of 2