Nettles v. Grounds, No. 12-16935 [July 26, 2016]

Nettles v. Grounds

The en banc court considered the district court’s dismissal of Nettles habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction. Nettle’s petition challenged a disciplinary violation on constitutional grounds and claimed that the failure to expunge this violation from his record could affect his eligibility for parole. The Court held, “that because Nettle’s claim does not fall within the ‘core of habeas corpus,’ it must be brought, if at all, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court ruled that “if a state prisoner’s claim does not lie at ‘the core of habeas corpus,’ it may not be brought in habeas corpus but must be brought, ‘if at all,’ under § 1983.” Here, since the parole board could “deny parole to Nettles even if he succeeded in expunging the 2008 rules violation report” his claim does not fall within the core of habeas corpus,” therefore, he must instead bring this claim under § 1983. The Court held “that a district court may construe a petition for habeas corpus to plead a cause of action under § 1983 after notifying and obtained informed consent from the prisoner.” It therefore, remanded the case to the district