Sylvester Mott-Bey filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, claiming that continued imprisonment amidst the COVID-19 pandemic is a violation of due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments as well as arguably a violation of the Eighth Amendment, and the court denied the petition for the following reasons. First, the court reasoned that Mott-Bey’s claims did not fall under a § 2254, because only constitutional challenges to the fact or duration of confinement are the proper subject of habeas petitions; instead, Mott-Bey challenged conditions of confinement, which are the proper subjects for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Furthermore, the court found that Mott-Bey failed to satisfy the exhaustion requirement, because (1) Mott-Bey acknowledged not having made claims in State courts, and (2) waiver does not apply to Mott-Bey because there are multiple ways available for him to seek remedies from State courts. As such, the court denied the habeas petition without prejudice. Additionally, the court noted that the certificate of appealability is also denied, because Mott-Bey failed to demonstrate a “substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right” in his petition (28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)).
Mott-Bey v. Horton, No. 2:20-cv-78, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113633 (W.D. Mich. June 30, 2020)
DETAILS
Decision
Date
6/30/2020
Practice Area
Criminal (State Charges)
Relief Requested
Release
Type of Court
Federal District Court
Location
Michigan
Type of Case
Individual
Case Characteristics
Post-Conviction Detention [jail or prison]
Release Granted
No
Compassionate Release Case
No
Case Tracking Number
2:20-cv-00078-PLM-MV
MORE CASE INFORMATION
Court Name
W.D. Mich.
Decision
Motion Denied
Place of Incarceration
State Prison
Name of Facility
Chippewa Correctional Facility (URF)
Legal Authority
Eighth Amendment - Deliberate Indifference, Procedural Due Process (both 14th and 5th Amendments)
Legal Authority
Section 1983, § 2254 Exhaustion, § 2254 Habeas
Convictions
Second-degree murder (Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.317)
Case Status
Decision Made
COVID-19 in Jail Prison or Detention Center
Not Discussed
Litigation Database
Crowdsourced legal documents from around the country related to COVID-19 and incarceration, organized, collected, and summarized for public defenders, litigators, and other advocates. Created and managed by Bronx Defenders, Columbia Law School’s Center for Institutional and Social Change, UCLA Law COVID-19 Behind Bars Data Project, and Zealous. Mostly federal court opinions, but now expanding to states and legal filings, declarations, and exhibits.
This resource is designed to help lawyers, advocates, researchers, journalists, and others interested in challenging, remedying, or drawing attention to the grave risk that Covid-19 poses to individuals who are detained.