Belyew v. Britt

Filing 11

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 9/7/2017 GRANTING 9 Motion to Proceed IFP and RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff to pay the filing fee of $350. All payments to be collected by the Sheriff of Butte County in accordance with the notice filed concurrently herewith. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LISA BELYEW,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:17-cv-1199-JAM-EFB P

v.

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

RONALD W. BRITT,

15

Defendant.

16
Plaintiff is a pretrial detainee proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

17
18
19

U.S.C. § 1983. She seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
I.

Request for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
Plaintiff’s application makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (2).

20
21

Accordingly, by separate order, the court directs the agency having custody of plaintiff to collect

22

and forward the appropriate monthly payments for the filing fee as set forth in 28 U.S.C.

23

§ 1915(b)(1) and (2).

24

II.

Screening Requirement and Standards

25

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek

26

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

27

§ 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion

28

of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
1

1

relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such

2

relief.” Id. § 1915A(b).

3

A pro se plaintiff, like other litigants, must satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a)

4

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8(a)(2) “requires a complaint to include a short and

5

plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, in order to give the

6

defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atl. Corp. v.

7

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 554, 562-563 (2007) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957)).

8

While the complaint must comply with the “short and plaint statement” requirements of Rule 8,

9

its allegations must also include the specificity required by Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556

10

U.S. 662, 679 (2009).

11

To avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim a complaint must contain more than “naked

12

assertions,” “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of

13

action.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555-557. In other words, “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of

14

a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements do not suffice.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at

15

678.

16

Furthermore, a claim upon which the court can grant relief must have facial plausibility.

17

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual

18

content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the

19

misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. When considering whether a complaint states a

20

claim upon which relief can be granted, the court must accept the allegations as true, Erickson v.

21

Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007), and construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the

22

plaintiff, see Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974).

23

III.

24

Screening Order
Plaintiff alleges that the defendant, a certified shorthand reporter for the Colusa County

25

Superior Court, is violating her rights in connection with an ongoing criminal prosecution of

26

plaintiff in Colusa County.1 ECF No. 1 at 1, 4. This action fails for this reason alone. Claims

27
28

1

Plaintiff has not provided a docket number, but the relevant case appears to be People v.
Belyew, CR-57771.
2

1

challenging aspects of the proceedings and rulings in this ongoing case must be raised in those

2

proceedings or on appeal afterwards. Under the Younger Abstention Doctrine, this court must

3

abstain from hearing plaintiff’s challenges to those state court proceedings. See Younger v.

4

Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 45, 46 (1971). Younger requires a district court to dismiss a federal action if

5

the relevant state proceedings are: (1) ongoing, (2) implicate important state interests, and (3)

6

provide plaintiff an adequate opportunity to raise the federal issue. Columbia Basin Apartment

7

Ass'n v. City of Pasco, 268 F.3d 791, 799 (9th Cir. 2001). All of these elements appear satisfied

8

here – the criminal proceedings are ongoing, important state interests are implicated in the

9

criminal prosecution, and there is no indication that plaintiff could not raise her claims in that

10

criminal case. Further, there is no allegation of extraordinary circumstances which would warrant

11

federal intervention. See Younger, 401 U.S. at 45 (federal courts may not intervene in state

12

criminal actions “except under extraordinary circumstances where the danger of irreparable loss

13

is both great and immediate.”).

14

Furthermore, the court finds that granting plaintiff leave to amend her complaint would be

15

futile. It is therefore recommend that it be dismissed with prejudice. See Hartmann v. CDCR,

16

707 F.3d 1114, 1130 (9th Cir. 2013) (“A district court may deny leave to amend when

17

amendment would be futile.”).

18

IV.

19

Order and Recommendation
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

20

1. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 9) is granted.

21

2. Plaintiff shall pay the statutory filing fee of $350. All payments shall be collected

22

by the Sheriff of Butte County in accordance with the notice to be filed

23

concurrently herewith.

24
25

Additionally, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with prejudice
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

26

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

27

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

28

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
3

1

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

2

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

3

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

4

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

5

Dated: September 7, 2017.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4