MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

The petitioner Mr. Hill, who is in the custody of the respondent pursuant to his convictions in the Criminal Court of Washington County, Tennessee, seeks herein a declaratory judgment by this Court, 28 U.S.C. § 2201,1 that such convictions are “ * * * unconstitutional and [to] [o]rder same void and of no effect and [o]rder the records relative to same expunged. * * * ” The respondent moved for a dismissal of this action for the failure of the petitioner to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion has merit.

“ * * * [F]ederal declaratory judgment proceedings cannot be used by a prisoner as a means of attack upon a [s]tate criminal judgment under which he is confined. * * * ” Morton v. Avery, C.A. 6th (1968), 393 F.2d 138, 139. Neither can such an action be used as a substitute for one seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Idem.; Ruip v. State of Kentucky, C.A. 6th (1968), 400 F.2d 871, 872[1]; Scruggs v. Henderson, C.A. 6th (1967), 380 F.2d 981, 982[1]; Olney v. State of Ohio, C.A. 6th (1965), 341 F.2d 913; Forsythe v. State of Ohio, C.A. 6th (1964), 333 F.2d 678, 679[2]. Mr. Hill’s exclusive federal remedy, if any, is by habeas corpus petition. Preiser v. Rodriguez (1973), 411 U.S. 475, 489-490, 93 S.Ct. 1827, 36 L.Ed.2d 439, 450[10],

*790The respondent’s aforementioned motion hereby is GRANTED, and this action hereby is DISMISSED for the failure of the plaintiff to state a claim herein upon which relief can be granted.2