Payne v. Cate et al

Filing 38

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/8/15 ORDERING that within 30 days of the date of this order, both parties shall file a supplemental brief on the issue of whether this action may proceed as a civil rights action, should be administratively stayed pending further proceedings if any in Nettles, or must be dismissed without prejudice to allow plaintiff to pursue habeas corpus relief.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MYRON A. PAYNE,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:12-cv-0243 DAD P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action. In his complaint,

18

plaintiff challenges his validation by prison officials as a member of the Black Guerilla Family

19

and claims that defendants have violated his right to due process under the Fourteenth

20

Amendment. Plaintiff requests the award of damages, release from the Security Housing Unit

21

(the “SHU”) at his institution of confinement, and expungement of any reference to gang

22

association from his prison file.

23

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a state prisoner properly challenged

24

his gang validation in a habeas corpus action. See Nettles v. Grounds, __ F.3d __, 2015 WL

25

3406160 (9th Cir. May 28, 2015). In Nettles, prison officials validated inmate Santos as a

26

member of the Mexican Mafia, removed him from the general prison population, and confined

27

him in the SHU indefinitely. Id. at *3. Santos unsuccessfully administratively appealed his gang

28

validation and then sought habeas corpus relief in state court to no avail. Id. Santos then filed a
1

1

federal habeas corpus petition challenging his gang validation as a violation of his right to due

2

process. Id. The district court dismissed the petition on the grounds that Santos’s claims

3

concerned his conditions of confinement rather than the fact or duration of his confinement. Id.

4

Reversing, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals explained:

5

The remedy Santos seeks of expungement of the gang validation
from his record and release from the SHU to the general prison
population, “can fairly be described as a quantum change in the
level of custody.” Additionally, success on his claim would result
in his immediate release from the SHU to the general population.
His claim that he was been subjected to greater restrictions of his
liberty without due process of law is therefore properly brought as a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

6
7
8
9
10

Id. at *10.

11

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty days of the date of

12

this order, both parties shall file a supplemental brief on the issue of whether this action may

13

proceed as a civil rights action, should be administratively stayed pending further proceedings – if

14

any – in Nettles, or must be dismissed without prejudice to allow plaintiff to pursue habeas corpus

15

relief.

16

Dated: June 8, 2015

17
18
19
20

DAD:9
payn0243.supp

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2