Gross v. Gunja, No. 4:2008cv02591 - Document 3 (N.D. Ohio 2008)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Denying the petition and dismissing this action, pursuant to 28:2243. The court further certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, 28:1915(a)(3). Signed by Judge Dan Aaron Polster on 12/10/08. (C,B)

Download PDF
Gross v. Gunja Doc. 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO CHARLES GROSS, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner, v. WARDEN GUNJA, Respondent. CASE NO. 4:08 CV 2591 JUDGE DAN AARON POLSTER MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER On October 31, 2008, petitioner pro se Charles Gross, an inmate at the Federal Correctional Institution at Schuylkill, filed the above-captioned habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner seeks an order reducing his federal sentence by two days for each day served at Northeast Ohio Correctional Center, on the ground that “the conditions at the NEOCC borderline on cruel and unusual punishment and this has caused him to serve a more onerous period of incarceration than that which was contemplated by the sentencing Court.” of his request. As appropriate confinement. a Petitioner cites numerous cases in support See Petition, p.5. threshold vehicle for matter, habeas challenging the corpus is conditions not of the one's Abuhouran v. Morrison, No. 02-3427, 49 Fed.Appx. 349 (6th Cir. Sept. 18, 2002); Okoro v. Scibana, No. 99-1322, 1999 WL Dockets.Justia.com 1252871 (6th Cir. Dec. 15, 1999). Further, the cases cited by petitioner in support of his request for sentence modification all concern downward departures made by the trial court at sentencing. As such, they are wholly inapplicable here. Accordingly, the petition is denied and this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243. The court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Dan Aaron Polster 12/10/08 DAN AARON POLSTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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.