William Johnson v. Davey
Filing
7
ORDER DISMISSING 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/12/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Attachments: # 1 1983 Complaint Form)(Sant Agata, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WILLIAM JOHNSON,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
15
RAYTHEL FISHER, Warden at Valley
State Prison,
Screening Memorandum
18
21
(Doc. 1)
Respondent.
17
20
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION
FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
v.
16
19
No. 1:17-cv-00602-SKO HC
Petitioner William Johnson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 He alleges that a prison disciplinary hearing
violated his due process and equal protection rights, and seeks reversal of the disciplinary
22
findings and return to full program status. The Court has reviewed the petition (Doc. 1) and
23
determined that the petition does not state a cognizable claim for habeas corpus relief.
24
Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the petition without prejudice to Petitioner’s alleging his
25
claims in an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
26
///
27
1
28
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), Petitioner consented, in writing, to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate
Judge to conduct all further proceedings in this case, including the entry of final judgment. Doc. 4.
1
1
I.
2
3
Preliminary Screening
Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases requires the Court to conduct a preliminary
review of each petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court must dismiss a petition "[i]f it
4
plainly appears from the petition . . . that the petitioner is not entitled to relief." Rule 4 of the
5
6
Rules Governing 2254 Cases; see also Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990).
7
A petition for habeas corpus should not be dismissed without leave to amend unless it appears
8
that no tenable claim for relief can be pleaded were such leave to be granted. Jarvis v. Nelson,
9
440 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir. 1971).
10
11
II.
The Petition Fails to State a Habeas Claim
A federal petition for writ of habeas corpus concerns whether a petitioner is in custody in
12
13
14
violation of the Constitution. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). "Habeas corpus is the exclusive remedy for a
state prisoner who challenges the fact or duration of his confinement and seeks immediate or
15
speedier release, even though such a claim may come within the literal terms of § 1983." Preiser
16
v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 488-89 (1973). Challenges to the conditions of prison life are
17
properly brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. McCarthy v. Bronson, 500 U.S. 136, 142 (1991).
18
19
Petitioner seeks redress for violations of his Due Process and Equal Protection rights in
the course of disciplinary proceedings that resulted in Petitioner’s losing certain programming
20
21
22
privileges. Because Petitioner is serving a sentence of life without parole, the disciplinary
sanctions do not concern the fact or duration of petitioner’s confinement nor seek immediate or
23
speedier release. Accordingly, Petitioner’s claims are appropriately pursued in a civil rights claim
24
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
25
26
Because Petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief, the Court must dismiss his
habeas corpus petition. Petitioner may pursue his claims by filing a civil rights complaint
27
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
28
2
1
2
III.
Certificate of Appealability
A petitioner seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal a
3
district court's denial of his petition, but may only appeal in certain circumstances. Miller-El v.
4
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003). The controlling statute in determining whether to issue a
5
certificate of appealability is 28 U.S.C. § 2253, which provides:
6
7
(a) In a habeas corpus proceeding or a proceeding under section 2255
before a district judge, the final order shall be subject to review, on appeal, by
the court of appeals for the circuit in which the proceeding is held.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
(b) There shall be no right of appeal from a final order in a proceeding
to test the validity of a warrant to remove to another district or place for
commitment or trial a person charged with a criminal offense against the
United States, or to test the validity of such person's detention pending
removal proceedings.
(c) (1) Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of
appealability, an appeal may not be taken to the court of appeals from—
(A) the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the
detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court; or
(B) the final order in a proceeding under section 2255.
16
17
18
(2) A certificate of appealability may issue under paragraph (1)
only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right.
20
(3) The certificate of appealability under paragraph (1) shall
indicate which specific issues or issues satisfy the showing required by
paragraph (2).
21
If a court denies a habeas petition, the court may only issue a certificate of appealability
19
22
"if jurists of reason could disagree with the district court's resolution of his constitutional claims
23
or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to
24
25
proceed further." Miller-El, 537 U.S. at 327; Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
26
Although the petitioner is not required to prove the merits of his case, he must demonstrate
27
"something more than the absence of frivolity or the existence of mere good faith on his . . .
28
part." Miller-El, 537 U.S. at 338.
3
1
2
3
Reasonable jurists would not find the Court's determination that Petitioner is not entitled
to federal habeas corpus relief to be debatable or wrong. Accordingly, the Court declines to issue
a certificate of appealability.
4
IV.
Conclusion and Order
5
It is hereby ordered:
6
7
1. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is hereby dismissed
without prejudice to Petitioner’s alleging his claims in a civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983;
8
9
10
2. The Clerk of Court is directed to forward to Petitioner a copy of
this order and a form for a complaint pursuant to § 1983; and
11
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the above-captioned case.
12
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
June 12, 2017
/s/
15
Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?