Bush v. Butte County
Filing
9
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 02/07/17 ORDERING that the 5 7 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED; petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice; the Court DECLINES to issue COA. (Benson, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JOSHUA MARCUS BUSH,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
v.
No. 2:16-cv-2779 KJN P
ORDER
BUTTE COUNTY,
15
Respondents.
16
17
Petitioner is housed at the Butte County Jail. Petitioner consented to proceed before the
18
undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of
19
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma
20
pauperis.
21
Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford
22
the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. See 28
23
U.S.C. § 1915(a).
24
Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254 provides for
25
summary dismissal of a habeas petition “[i]f it plainly appears from the face of the petition and
26
any exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” Id.
27
28
A habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is the proper vehicle for a state
prisoner’s challenge to the validity or length of his sentence, but challenges to a prisoner’s
1
1
conditions of confinement must be brought through a civil rights action. Wilkinson v. Dotson,
2
544 U.S. 74, 81-82 (2005); Nettles v. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 931 (9th Cir. 2016) (adopting “the
3
Supreme Court’s strong suggestion that a § 1983 action is the exclusive vehicle for claims that are
4
not within the core of habeas.”). A civil rights action is the “proper remedy” for a prisoner “who
5
is making a constitutional challenge to the conditions of his prison life, but not to the fact or
6
length of his custody.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 499 (1973).
7
Here, petitioner does not challenge his conviction, the execution of his sentence, or the
8
fact of his custody or incarceration. Rather, petitioner challenges allegedly unsanitary conditions
9
at the Butte County Jail including, but not limited to, food service and grooming. (ECF No. 1 at
10
7.) Such allegations do not implicate the fact or duration of petitioner’s sentence and such claims
11
“must be brought, if at all, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” Nettles, 830 F.3d at 925 (citing Preiser, 411
12
U.S. at 487.) Because petitioner’s claims do not sound in habeas, his petition must be summarily
13
dismissed.
14
In addition, the undersigned will not construe petitioner’s filing as a civil rights complaint
15
for multiple reasons. First, it appears that petitioner attempts to bring such claims on behalf of
16
other inmates, perhaps as a class action. Plaintiff, however, is a non-lawyer proceeding without
17
counsel. It is well established that a layperson cannot ordinarily represent the interests of other
18
inmates or a class. See McShane v. United States, 366 F.2d 286 (9th Cir. 1966). This rule
19
becomes almost absolute when, as here, the putative class representative is incarcerated and
20
proceeding pro se. Oxendine v. Williams, 509 F.2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1975). In direct terms,
21
plaintiff cannot “fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class,” as required by Rule
22
23(a)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Martin v. Middendorf, 420 F. Supp. 779
23
(D. D.C. 1976). Thus, each inmate must file his own civil rights complaint.
24
Second, in order to pursue a civil rights complaint, petitioner must pay the court’s filing
25
fee. Even if petitioner is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, he will be required to pay
26
the $350.00 filing fee in installments from his prison trust account. Thus, petitioner should
27
decide whether he wishes to pursue a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and incur the
28
$350.00 filing fee.
2
1
Finally, petitioner is also pursuing a civil rights action challenging, inter alia, the allegedly
2
unsanitary conditions at the Butte County Jail. Bush v. Butte County Sheriff’s Office, No. 2:16-
3
cv-2844 AC (E.D. Cal.). Petitioner is cautioned that he may not pursue the same allegations in
4
two different cases.
5
6
For all of the above reasons, the court declines to construe the petition as a civil rights
complaint, but dismisses the action without prejudice.1
7
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
8
1. Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;
9
2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed without prejudice; and
10
3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C.
11
§ 2253.
12
Dated: February 7, 2017
13
14
15
/bush2779.156
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1
25
26
27
28
Petitioner has submitted exhibits on two occasions, December 30, 2016 (212 pages), and
January 26, 2017 (104 pages). The court is not a repository for evidence. Evidence should not be
submitted to the court until this action reaches an appropriate stage in litigation for the submission
of evidence, such as in response to a motion for summary judgment, at trial, or when specifically
requested by the Court. Because the exhibits were improperly submitted, and petitioner also
submitted numerous exhibits in his pending civil rights action, 2:16-cv-2844 WBS AC, the
undersigned will not direct the Clerk to file the instant exhibits in petitioner’s civil rights action.
3
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?