From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hood v. Wilson

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Aug 11, 2010
389 F. App'x 522 (6th Cir. 2010)

Summary

dismissing as moot appeal from denial of habeas petition on claim that "appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge [petitioner's] sentence" because petitioner had been discharged from custody

Summary of this case from Lightfoot v. Scutt

Opinion

No. 09-3165.

August 11, 2010.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.

Before: COLE and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges; MAYS, District Judge.

The Honorable Samuel H. Mays, Jr., United States District Judge for the Western District of Tennessee, sitting by designation.


OPINION


Petitioner Steven Hood appeals the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus. Because Hood's period of incarceration has expired, we find the appeal is now moot. See United States v. Waltanen, 356 Fed.Appx. 848, 851 (6th Cir.2G09) ("If a prisoner does not challenge the validity of the conviction but rather only challenges his sentence or some aspect of it, the request for relief is moot once the challenged portion of the sentence has expired.") (quoting United States v. Goldberg, 239 Fed.Appx. 993, 994 (6th Cir. 2007)). The sole issue before this court is whether Hood's appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge his sentence of incarceration pursuant to State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1, 845 N.E.2d 470 (2006). On February 6, 2006, Hood was sentenced to five years of incarceration, with eligibility for judicial release after serving four years. On February 24 2010, Hood sent a letter to the court stating that he had been discharged from his prison term on February 22, 2010. Because he has served the challenged portion of his sentence, his petition is DISMISSED as moot.


Summaries of

Hood v. Wilson

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Aug 11, 2010
389 F. App'x 522 (6th Cir. 2010)

dismissing as moot appeal from denial of habeas petition on claim that "appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge [petitioner's] sentence" because petitioner had been discharged from custody

Summary of this case from Lightfoot v. Scutt
Case details for

Hood v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:Steven HOOD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Julius WILSON, Warden…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date published: Aug 11, 2010

Citations

389 F. App'x 522 (6th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Limon v. Brewer

Her sentencing claims are therefore moot. See Hood v. Wilson, 389 Fed.Appx. 522 (6th Cir. 2010)…

Lightfoot v. Scutt

The court can provide no further remedy for the constitutional violations he alleges, and his habeas claims…