Beasley v. Lake County Sheriff's Office et al

Filing 29

ORDER DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND by Judge William H. Orrick granting 22 Motion to Dismiss and 25 Motion to Dismiss. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before November 15, 2013. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBBY ALAN BEASLEY,

Case No. 12-1640 WHO (PR)

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Plaintiff,
12

v.
13
14

LAKE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE,
et al.,

15

ORDER DISMISSING THE
COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO
AMEND

Defendants.

16
17
18

INTRODUCTION

19

This is a federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a pro se

20

state prisoner. For the reasons stated herein, defendants' motions to dismiss the first

21

amended complaint are GRANTED. The Court dismisses the amended complaint with

22

leave to file a second amended complaint on or before November 15, 2013.

23
24
25

DISCUSSION
A.

Standard of Review
Dismissal is proper where the complaint fails to "state a claim upon which relief can

26

be granted." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). "While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6)

27

motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations . . . a plaintiff's obligation to

28

1

provide the 'grounds' of his 'entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than labels and

2

conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do . . . .

3

Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level."

4

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 553-56 (2007) (citations omitted). A

5

motion to dismiss should be granted if the complaint does not proffer "enough facts to state

6

a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 570.

7

B.

8
9

Legal Claims
Plaintiff alleges that (1) Lake County Sheriff's Deputies Thomas, Holland, Hockett,

and Gibson violated his Fourth Amendment rights by forcibly taking a blood sample
without probable cause, and (2) the bail amount set by the Lake County Superior Court

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

was excessive. Neither states a claim for relief.

12

Claim 1 is DISMISSED with leave to amend for two reasons. First, plaintiff has

13

not shown either that the criminal charges related to this blood draw did not result in a

14

conviction, or that any resulting conviction has been overturned. "[I]n order to recover

15

damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm

16

caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a

17

§ 1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct

18

appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to

19

make such determination, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of

20

habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254." Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). "A

21

claim for damages bearing that relationship to a conviction or sentence that has not been so

22

invalidated is not cognizable under § 1983." Id. Second, plaintiff has not provided some

23

significant information, including the date on which this event alleged occurred, how much

24

force was used to restrain him, and which defendants performed which exact action (who

25

restrained him, what method of restraint, for what time period, etc.).

26

Claim 2 regarding the allegedly excessive bail amount is unrelated to the first claim

27

and is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice and without leave to amend. Plaintiff may

28

pursue this claim in a separate action, but he may find any action barred. The issue of his
2

1

bail is likely moot now that he is in custody at San Quentin State Prison rather than in Lake

2

County. If he chooses to pursue the claim and it is not moot, he should specify why the

3

bail was excessive in light of the purpose for which it was set.

4

Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall file

5

an amended complaint on or before November 15, 2013. The first amended complaint

6

must include the caption and civil case number used in this order (12-1640 WHO (PR))

7

and the words SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an

8

amended complaint completely replaces the previous complaints, plaintiff must include in

9

his amended complaint all the claims he wishes to present and all of the defendants he
wishes to sue. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). Any claims

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

not raised in the amended complaint will be deemed waived. Plaintiff may not incorporate

12

material from the prior complaint by reference. Failure to file an amended complaint in

13

accordance with this order will result in dismissal of this action without further notice to

14

plaintiff.

15

It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the Court

16

informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice

17

of Change of Address.” He must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion or ask

18

for an extension of time to do so. Failure to comply may result in the dismissal of this

19

action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

20

The Clerk shall terminate Docket Nos. 22 and 25.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

Dated: October 7, 2013
_________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBBY ALAN BEASLEY,

Case Number: CV12-01640 WHO

Plaintiff,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

v.
LAKE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE et al,
Defendant.

/

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on October 7, 2013, I SERVED a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing said copy
in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope
in the U.S. Mail.

Robby Alan Beasley AN2420
San Quentin State Prison
San Quentin, CA 94974

Dated: October 7, 2013
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jean Davis, Deputy Clerk