Lamar Johnson v. Allenby et al

Filing 8

ORDER OF TRANSFER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James on 12/16/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Proof of Service)(rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2014) [Transferred from cand on 12/18/2014.]

1
2
3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6
7

LAMAR JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

No. C 14-4540 MEJ (PR)
ORDER OF TRANSFER

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

v.
CLIFF ALLENBY, et al.,
Defendants.
/

12
13

Plaintiff is a civil detainee at the Coalinga State Hospital ("Coalinga") proceeding pro

14

se. He is detained pursuant to California's Sexually Violent Predator Act ("SVPA"). He has

15

filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, complaining about the conditions of his

16

confinement at Coalinga. Defendants are officials of Coalinga and of the California

17

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in Sacramento. Both Coalinga and

18

Sacramento lie within the venue of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of

19

California. Venue for this case is therefore proper in the Eastern District. See 28 U.S.C.

20

§ 1391.

21

Petitioner also complains about the validity of his assessment as a sexually violent

22

predator under the SVPA, which assessment took place in San Mateo County. Challenges to

23

the assessment itself are the province of a habeas petition, not a civil rights action, because

24

they implicate the validity of his detention. See Hill v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 573, 579

25

(2006) (challenges to the lawfulness of confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are

26

the province of habeas corpus); Nelson v. Sandritter, 351 F.2d 284, 285 (9th Cir. 1965)

27

(constitutionality of state civil commitment proceedings are challenged in federal habeas

28

corpus once state remedies have been exhausted). Plaintiff may challenge the validity of his

1

assessment in this court, but he must do so by way of a habeas petition filed in a separate

2

action from the instant civil rights case, after exhausting state judicial remedies.

3

Accordingly, and in the interests of justice, this case is TRANSFERRED to the United

4

States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. 1404(a), 1406(a).

5

In light of this transfer, the pending motions (dkt. 2, 6) to proceed in forma pauperis are

6

deferred to the Eastern District.

UNIT
ED

DATED: December 16, 2014

Maria-Elena James
United States Magistrate Judge
aria-Ele
Judge M

RT

12

ER

H

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

s

na Jame

LI

11

NO

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

A

9

R NIA

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

FO

8

S

The Clerk shall transfer this matter forthwith.

RT
U
O

7

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C