Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_19-cv-00312/USCOURTS-ared-4_19-cv-00312-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dexter Payne
Defendant
Kenneth L Waller
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

CENTRAL DIVISION 

KENNETH L WALLER, * 

ADC #103829 * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * 

v. * No. 4:19-cv-00312-BSM-JJV 

 * 

DEXTER PAYNE, Director, * 

Arkansas Division of Correction, * 

 * 

 Respondent, * 

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INSTRUCTIONS

The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge 

Brian S. Miller. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. 

Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If the 

objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports 

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

United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen days from the date of the findings and 

recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely 

objections may result in a waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. 

If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or 

additional evidence, and to have a new hearing for this purpose before either the District Judge or 

Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file your written objections, include the following: 

1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate. 

2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if such a hearing is granted) 

was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge. 

Case 4:19-cv-00312-BSM Document 11 Filed 12/03/19 Page 1 of 4
2 

3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at the new hearing in the form 

of an offer of proof, and a copy, or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial 

evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing. 

From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional 

evidentiary hearing. Mail your objections and “Statement of Necessity” to: 

Clerk, United States District Court 

Eastern District of Arkansas 

600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 

Little Rock, AR 72201-3325 

I. DISPOSITION 

 On August 12, 2010, Kenneth Waller, Petitioner, pleaded guilty to felony theft of property 

and was sentenced to ten years’ suspended imposition of sentence. (Doc. No. 8-2 at 1.) On May 

15, 2018, Waller pleaded guilty to violating the terms and conditions of his suspended imposition 

of sentence and was sentenced to three years imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of 

Correction (“ADC”). (Doc. No. 8-3 and 8-4.) 

The Arkansas Parole Board ordered Mr. Waller’s custody transferred to the Arkansas 

Department of Community Correction (“ACC”) after he completed a Substance Abuse Treatment 

Plan (“SATP”). (Doc. No. 8-6.) Mr. Waller asked the Parole Board for reconsideration regarding 

the pre-release condition three times, with each being denied on December 16, 2018, February 1, 

2019, and February 24, 2019. (Docs. No. 8-7, 8-8, & 8-9.) On March 28, 2019, Mr. Waller filed 

a Petition for Judicial Review of the Parole Board’s decision in the Pulaski County Circuit Court. 

(Doc. No. 8-11.) In the petition, Waller claims the Arkansas Parole Board’s determination of his 

parole-eligibility date and imposition of the SATP pre-release condition violate his federal and 

state constitutional rights. On September 23, 2019, the circuit court dismissed the petition after 

finding Mr. Waller had not properly served the Respondent according to Rule 4(i) of the Arkansas 

Case 4:19-cv-00312-BSM Document 11 Filed 12/03/19 Page 2 of 4
3 

Rules of Civil Procedure. Waller v. John Felts, Chairman, Arkansas Parole Board, No. 60CV-19-

2081 (Pulaski County Cir. Ct. filed March 28, 2019). 

Mr. Waller filed the instant petition for federal habeas relief on May 1, 2019, alleging the 

ADC calculation of his parole eligibility date violated his rights under due process, ex post facto, 

and equal protection clauses of the United States Constitution. Additionally, he asserts that the 

SATP pre-release condition constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth 

Amendment and violates his constitutional rights under the due process, ex post facto, equal 

protection, and double jeopardy clauses. 

On July 26, 2019, the Arkansas Parole Board rescinded Mr. Waller’s transfer eligibility 

after a major disciplinary action for “Possession/Introduc[ing] Drugs” and 

“Possession/Introduction of Clothing” into the facility. (Doc. No. 10-1 at 2.) Mr. Waller’s inmate 

classification rating was lowered from a Class II to a Class IV because of the infraction. On 

November 7, 2019, Mr. Waller received another major disciplinary infraction, this time for battery, 

assault, and failure to obey the orders of staff. His classification remains at Class IV because of 

this incident. (Doc. No. 10-1 at 1.) 

Given Mr. Waller’s recent change in status, he is now ineligible for a transfer into ACC for 

parole. Thus, his claims regarding the SATP pre-transfer condition are now moot and his Petition 

should be dismissed. 

II. CONCLUSION

IT IS, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED THAT: 

1. Mr. Waller’s § 2241 Petition (Doc. No. 2) be DISMISSED and the requested relief 

be DENIED. 

Case 4:19-cv-00312-BSM Document 11 Filed 12/03/19 Page 3 of 4
4 

2. No certificate of appealability shall issue.1

DATED this 3rd day of December 2019. 

 

 

__________________________ 

JOE J. VOLPE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

 1

Pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States 

District Courts, a district court “must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a 

final order adverse to the applicant.” In cases where the Petition is clearly successive, no certificate 

of appealability shall be issued. 

Case 4:19-cv-00312-BSM Document 11 Filed 12/03/19 Page 4 of 4