Frazier v. Superintendent, No. 3:2013cv01335 - Document 3 (N.D. Ind. 2013)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE for want of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 12/23/2013. (lyb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TYRONE FRAZIER, Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 3:13-CV-1335-TS OPINION AND ORDER Tyrone Frazier, a pro se prisoner, filed this habeas corpus petition attempting to challenge his guilty plea for Possession of Marijuana and his sentence of two years probation by the Marion Superior Court on March 10, 1988. To obtain habeas corpus relief, a petitioner must be in custody. 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254(a). This requires that the habeas petitioner be in custody under the conviction or sentence under attack at the time his petition is filed. Maleng v. Cook, 490 U.S. 488, 490 91 (1989). Here, Frazier s probation on this conviction ended decades ago and though he is currently in prison he is not in custody on this charge. Because he is not in custody on the conviction he is attempting to challenge, this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. See Id. at 493. For the foregoing reasons, this case is DISMISSED for want of subject matter jurisdiction. SO ORDERED on December 23, 2013. s/ Theresa L. Springmann THERESA L. SPRINGMANN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORT WAYNE DIVISION
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
