Stevens v. Napa State Hospital

Filing 4

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. The petition is DISMISSED as premature. Stevens's second claim, which arises from the conditions of confinement at Napa State Hospital is DISMISSED without prejudice. Stevens may file a separate civil rights action if he seeks relief on his conditions of confinement claims. Stevens's 3 application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/31/2014.(jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DEAN STEVENS,

Case No. 13-cv-05400-WHO (PR)

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Petitioner,
12
v.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

13
14

NAPA STATE HOSPITAL,
Respondent.

15
16
17

Petitioner Dean Stevens is being detained at the Napa State Hospital. It is unclear

18

from the petition whether he is awaiting trial, or has been tried and is awaiting sentencing.

19

What is clear is that he has not been sentenced for charges he faced in the Mendocino

20

County Superior Court. Dkt. 1, p.2. Although he has filed a federal habeas petition for

21

initial review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243 and Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section

22

2254 Cases, the petition is DISMISSED as premature.

23

This Court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person

24

in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in

25

custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C.

26

§ 2254(a). A district court considering an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall

27

“award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ

28

should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person

1

detained is not entitled thereto.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Summary dismissal is appropriate

2

only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or

3

patently frivolous or false. See Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990).

4

As grounds for federal habeas relief, Stevens alleges that he and other inmates at

5

Napa State Hospital are not "get[ting] the same 4013 credits bec[a]use we are

6

incompeten[t]." (Pet. at 3.) But because Stevens has not yet been sentenced, it is unknown

7

what credits he will be awarded or denied, including those he may have accrued during his

8

detention at Napa State Hospital. It is therefore premature to consider his claim.

9

Under principles of comity and federalism, a federal court should not interfere with
ongoing state criminal proceedings by granting injunctive or declaratory relief absent

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

extraordinary circumstances. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 43-54 (1971). More

12

specifically, federal courts should not enjoin pending state criminal prosecutions absent a

13

showing of the state's bad faith or harassment, or a showing that the statute challenged is

14

"flagrantly and patently violative of express constitutional prohibitions." Id. at 46, 53-54.

15

Younger abstention is required when (1) state proceedings, judicial in nature, are pending;

16

(2) the state proceedings involve important state interests; and (3) the state proceedings

17

afford adequate opportunity to raise the constitutional issue. See Middlesex County Ethics

18

Comm. v. Garden State Bar Ass'n, 457 U.S. 423, 432 (1982).

19

Abstention is appropriate here because all of the elements of Younger are present.

20

Nothing in the petition suggests there are extraordinary circumstances requiring this

21

Court's interference in state court criminal proceedings. As to the first Younger element,

22

the record demonstrates that Stevens's state court proceedings are ongoing. As to the

23

second Younger element, the Supreme Court has held that "a proper respect for state

24

functions," such as ongoing criminal trial proceedings, is an important issue of state

25

interest. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 491-92 (1973) (quoting Younger, 401

26

U.S. at 44). As to the third prong of Younger, the Court finds no reason that Stevens

27

cannot pursue his claims in state court. Furthermore, any interference by this Court in the

28

state court proceedings would cause results disapproved of by Younger. SJSVCCPAC v.
2

1

City of San Jose, 546 F.3d 1087, 1092 (9th Cir. 2008) (citing cases). Thus, Younger

2

abstention is applicable here.

3

When Younger applies and the party seeks injunctive relief, as does Stevens, federal

4

courts should dismiss the action in its entirety. See Colorado River Water Conserv. Dist.

5

v. U.S., 424 U.S. 800, 816 n.22 (1976). Accordingly, the petition is DISMISSED without

6

prejudice on grounds of abstention.

7

Stevens's second claim, which arises from the conditions of confinement (detention

8

in solitary confinement, inadequate medical care, etc.) at Napa State Hospital is

9

DISMISSED without prejudice. Claims regarding conditions of confinement should be
raised in a civil rights action, not a habeas petition. Stevens may file a separate civil rights

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

action if he seeks relief on his conditions of confinement claims.

12

Stevens's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 3) is GRANTED.

13

The Clerk shall terminate Docket No. 3, enter judgment in favor of respondents, and close

14

the file.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 31, 2014
_________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEAN STEVENS,

Case Number: CV13-05400 WHO

Plaintiff,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

v.
DIRECTOR, NAPA STATE HOSPITAL 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 March 31, 2014, 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.

Dean Stevens 210736-0
Napa State Hospital
2100 Napa/Vallejo HWY
Napa, CA 94558-6293

Dated: March 31, 2014
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jean Davis, Deputy Clerk