Brewster, Jr. v. Wingate et al

Filing 8

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nandor Vadas on 8/6/2014. (njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/6/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

EUREKA DIVISION

6
7

CARLOS RAY BREWSTER, Jr.,
No. C 14-3346 NJV (PR)
Plaintiff,

8

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
v.

9

JUDGE HENRY T. WINGATE, et. al.,
Defendant.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

/
12
13
14

Plaintiff has filed a pro se civil rights complaint. The court granted Plaintiff leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 7.)

15
16
17

DISCUSSION
A.

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

18

seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

19

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and

20

dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may

21

be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at

22

1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police

23

Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

24

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of

25

the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not necessary;

26

the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the

27

grounds upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations

28

omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual

1

allegations, . . . a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds’ of his 'entitle[ment] to relief'

2

requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a

3

cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief

4

above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)

5

(citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is

6

plausible on its face." Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has recently explained

7

the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can provide the

8

framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations. When there are

9

well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine
whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

679 (2009).

12

B.

Legal Claims
Plaintiff is a federal prisoner currently incarcerated in Lompoc, CA, which is located

13
14

in the Central District of California. He was sentenced to 262 months of imprisonment,

15

based on a conviction in the Southern District of Mississippi. U.S. v. Brewster, 137 F.3d

16

853 (5th Cir. 1998). Named as Defendants in this action are Judge Henry T. Wingate of

17

the Southern District of Mississippi, and the Clerk of that Court. After reviewing Plaintiff’s

18

complaint, it is not clear the relief that he seeks or the nature of his claim. He states that

19

the Defendants improperly removed money from his prison trust account and he states that

20

there were two disbursements of one billion dollars each. Plaintiff seeks his release from

21

prison.

22

A civil rights action is not the proper vehicle to seek release from prison. Plaintiff

23

must file a § 2255 or § 2241 action if appropriate. Moreover, a federal judge is absolutely

24

immune from civil liability for acts performed in his judicial capacity and, unlike the judicial

25

immunity available to state judges sued under § 1983, a federal judge's immunity is not

26

limited to immunity from damages, but extends to actions for declaratory, injunctive and

27

other equitable relief. See Moore v. Brewster, 96 F.3d 1240, 1243 (9th Cir. 1996); Mullis v.

28
2

1

U.S. Bankruptcy Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1394 (9th Cir. 1987) (applying judicial immunity to

2

actions under Bivens). This is because Congress has provided carefully structured

3

procedures for taking appeals and for petitioning for extraordinary writs in Title 28 of the

4

United States Code if a federal judge violates a litigant's constitutional rights in a

5

proceeding pending in federal court. See id. Absolute immunity "is not reserved solely for

6

judges, but extends to nonjudicial officers for all claims relating to the exercise of judicial

7

functions." Burton v. Infinity Capital Management, 753 F.3d 954, 959 (9th Cir. 2014)

8

(internal quotations and citations omitted). Courts "take a functional approach to whether a

9

nonjudicial officer is entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity by looking to ‘the nature of
the function performed and not to the identity of the actor performing it.'" Id. at 960 (quoting

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Curry v. Castillo, 297 F.3d 940, 948 (9th Cir. 2002)).

12

Both Defendants are immune from suit. Further, neither Defendant is located in this

13

district, and none of the improprieties is alleged to have occurred in this district. No amount

14

of amendment would cure these deficiencies. Accordingly, the court will dismiss this case

15

without leave to amend for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted.

16

CONCLUSION

17

1. The complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice for the reasons set forth above.

18

2. The Clerk shall close this case.

19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

Dated: August 6, 2014.
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

21
22
23

G:\PRO-SE\NJV\CR.14\Brewster3346.dis.wpd

24
25
26
27
28
3

1
2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
EUREKA DIVISION

5
6
7

Plaintiff,

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No.1:14-CV-3346 NJV

CARLOS RAY BREWSTER, JR.,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

v.
JUDGE HENRY T. WINGATE, et al,
Defendants.

/

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that on August 6, 2014, I served true and correct copies of
the attached by placing said copies in postage paid envelopes addressed to the person(s) listed
below, and depositing said envelopes in the U.S. Mail.
Carlos Ray Brewster, Jr.
04045043
LOMPOC
U.S. PENITENTIARY
Inmate Mail/Parcels
3901 KLEIN BLVD
LOMPOC, CA 93436

20
21
22
23

/s/ Linn Van Meter
Linn Van Meter
Administrative Law Clerk to the
Honorable Nandor J. Vadas

24
25
26
27
28
4