United States District Court, D. New Mexico
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL
MATTER is before the Court under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on the
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Petitioner
Herbert Manygoat (Doc. 1), as amended by his amended petition
(Doc. 3)and Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(Doc. 9) (“the Petition”). The Court dismisses
the Petition based on the doctrine of abstention or, in the
alternative, for failure to exhaust state court remedies.
Herbert Manygoat filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
on August 28, 2017. (Doc. 1). Manygoat's Petition
indicates he is a pretrial detainee awaiting trial on New
Mexico state charges of 1st Degree Kidnapping
(Intent to Commit Sex Crimes) and Aggravated Battery (Deadly
Weapon). See Doc. 1 at 2-5; State of New Mexico
v. Herbert Manygoat, No. M-47-FR-2016-00267. Since the
filing of his Petition, Manygoat has filed nine amendments or
supplements to the Petition. (Doc. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11,
difficult to decipher, Manygoat's Petition appears to
seek release from detention on three grounds: (1) that his
counsel has been ineffective by failing to obtain
Manygoat's release due to a medical disability (Doc. 1 at
2-3); (2) that one of the victims is not cooperating and the
charges should be dismissed because her accusations are false
(Doc. 1 at 3-4); and (3) that Manygoat is actually innocent
of the crimes charged (Doc. 1 at 3). His amendments and
supplements to the Petition make similar allegations and also
contend that another inmate is making false statements to
others in the correctional facility that Manygoat is a sex
offender. (Doc. 11, 14).
The Court Grants Petitioner Manygoat's Application to
Proceed In Forma Pauperis
initiated this proceeding, Manygoat did not file an
application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs under
28 U.S.C. § 1915, nor did he pay the $5 filing fee. The
Court entered an Order to Cure Deficiency on March 28, 2018.
(Doc. 11). In response to the Order to Cure Deficiency,
Petitioner Manygoat filed an Application to Proceed in
District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs. (Doc. 12,
13). The Court has conducted the review required by 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a) and grants the Application to Proceed (Doc.
The Court Strikes Petitioner Manygoat's Civil Rights
commenced this proceeding as a habeas corpus case. (Doc. 1).
In some of his supplemental and amended filings, Manygoat
makes allegations and asserts claims in the nature of civil
rights claims. Manygoat states “I got recourse through
courts of New Mexico Tort Claims Act and 42 U.S.C. §
1983 civil rights claims” (Doc. 14 at 1) . .
.“Please assist me at receiving some (money) concerning
the false labeling of being a ‘rapist.'”
(Doc. 14 at 4).
Manygoat has been previously advised, habeas corpus is not
available or appropriate as a damages remedy. Preiser v.
Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 498-99 (1973). See CV 18-00222
JB/KRS, Doc. 3. Further, it is unreasonable to expect the
Court continually to have to adapt as the petitioner develops
new theories or locates new respondents or defendants.
Minter v. Prime Equipment Co., 451 F.3d 1196, 1206
(10th Cir.2006). Last, rambling and incomprehensible filings
that bury material allegations in “a morass of
irrelevancies” do not meet Rule 8(a)'s pleading
requirement of a “short and plain statement.”
Mann v. Boatright, 477 F.3d 1140, 1148
(10th Cir. 2007); Ausherman v. Stump, 643
F.2d 715, 716 (10th Cir.1981). A pro se complaint may be
stricken or dismissed under Rule 8(a) if it is
“incomprehensible.” See Carpenter v.
Williams, 86 F.3d 1015, 1016 (10th Cir.1996); Olguin
v. Atherton, 215 F.3d 1337 (10th Cir.
supplemental and amended filings are largely
incomprehensible, allege claims that are unrelated to his
original habeas corpus filing, and seek damages which are
unavailable in a habeas corpus proceeding. The Court will
strike Doc. 11 and 14 as violative of Fed.R.Civ.P. 8. If
Manygoat wishes to pursue civil rights claims, he must file a
proper civil rights complaint in a separate
The Court Will Dismiss Manygoat's Habeas Corpus Petition
habeas corpus Petition, Manygoat appears to be challenging
his pretrial detention based on charges in a pending San Juan
County, New Mexico Magistrate Court criminal proceeding, No.
M-47-FR-2016-00627. (Doc. 1 at 7, 10-24). His allegations are
difficult to follow, but seems to seek dismissal of the
criminal proceeding or release from custody on three
grounds-ineffective assistance of counsel, failure of the
victims' allegations, and actual innocence. (Doc. 1 at
respect to ineffective assistance of counsel, Petitioner
Manygoat claims that he is physically disabled as a result of
tibia and fibula fractures of his legs in 1995 and 2016.
(Doc. 1 at 2). Manygoat contends that his Public Defender,
Scott M. Curtis, ignored his disabilities, saying “I
don't care. Because I'm retiring!!” (Doc. 1 at
2). He claims that “[f]ormer Public Defender Scott M.
Curtis was present only for the record. But, supposedly not
even for Defending me. . . the Physically Disabled accused. .
.So, ineffective assistance of Council just remains.”
(Doc. 1 at 3) (emphasis in the original).
the second grounds, Manygoat contends:
“Victims refuses assisting in the unreasonable
prosecutions. . . Victim-Rolinda Benally failed appearing for
scheduled preliminary hearing on 10/12/2016. Therefore; her
case for ‘kidnapping' and ‘aggravated