Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Beletsky v. Borgen
Citation: 27 F. App'x 623Docket: No. 01-2125
Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; October 17, 2001; Federal Appellate Court
Carl Beletsky, a Wisconsin inmate serving a life sentence at Fox Lake Correctional Institution, filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to contest his transfer to a private out-of-state prison. The district court denied his petition, which was affirmed on appeal. Beletsky’s main argument against the transfer was that it would impede his participation in a veterans’ support group, claiming this would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The court clarified that Beletsky's petition was mischaracterized as one under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, as he was not challenging the duration or fact of his custody but rather attempting to prevent the transfer. The court indicated that Beletsky could have pursued his claims through 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or the ADA, but these were not applicable under the habeas corpus framework he chose. Beletsky has accumulated three strikes under the Prison Litigation Reform Act due to previous frivolous claims, leading to a total of four strikes, which prohibits him from filing future civil suits in forma pauperis. The court also noted that any potential ADA claim regarding accommodations must be pursued in state court due to Eleventh Amendment protections. Ultimately, the appellate court affirmed the district court’s judgment, confirming the frivolous nature of Beletsky’s claims and his resulting strikes under the law.