Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denied Victor D. Vickers, Jr.’s motion for a temporary restraining order in his federal habeas action against Angela Mesmer. The court concluded that Vickers was unlikely to succeed on claims concerning Missouri jail-time credits, a newly enacted state statute, and good-time or time-credit release because the claims were either not cognizable under federal habeas review, unexhausted, or based on state-law issues that did not establish a protected liberty interest. The court therefore denied the motion without addressing the remaining temporary-relief factors.
Holdings
- A claim seeking federal habeas relief based on the interpretation and application of Missouri's jail-time-credit statute is not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 merely because the petitioner characterizes the state-law dispute as a due-process violation.
- A federal habeas court may not review a newly asserted state-law claim that has not been exhausted in state court when the petitioner has not shown that state proceedings would be futile or ineffective.
- Missouri's good-time-credit and administrative-parole provisions do not create a protected liberty interest in receiving good-time credits or being released on a projected time-credit release date.
- Vickers was not entitled to a temporary restraining order because he failed to demonstrate a fair chance of prevailing on any of his four habeas claims.
Questions Presented
- Whether Vickers demonstrated a fair chance of success on his claim that Missouri's calculation of jail-time credits violated federal due process.
- Whether Vickers's challenge under the 2026 amendment to Missouri Revised Statutes § 558.031 was reviewable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 despite failure to exhaust state remedies.
- Whether Missouri's good-time-credit and administrative-parole provisions created a protected liberty interest giving rise to a federal due-process claim.
- Whether Vickers was entitled to a temporary restraining order requiring his immediate release from custody.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (33)
- Branstad v. Glickman, 118 F. Supp. 2d 925, 936 (N.D. Iowa 2000)(followed)
- Kroupa v. Nielsen, 731 F.3d 813, 818 (8th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. C L Systems, Inc., 640 F.2d 109, 113 (8th Cir. 1981) (en banc)(followed)
- Roudachevski v. All-American Care Centers, Inc., 648 F.3d 701, 706 (8th Cir. 2011)(followed)
- Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds, 530 F.3d 724, 732 (8th Cir. 2008) (en banc)(followed)
- Phyllis Schlafly Revocable Trust v. Cori, 924 F.3d 1004, 1009 (8th Cir. 2019)(followed)
- General Motors Corp. v. Harry Brown's, LLC, 563 F.3d 312, 319 (8th Cir. 2009)(followed)
- Chlorine Institute, Inc. v. Soo Line Railroad, 792 F.3d 903, 914 (8th Cir. 2015)(followed)
- Cigna Corp. v. Bricker, 103 F.4th 1336, 1343 (8th Cir. 2024)(followed)
- Heartland Academy Community Church v. Waddle, 335 F.3d 684, 690 (8th Cir. 2003)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 33.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.