Beal v. Ryan

Filing 6

ORDER OF DISMISSAL (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 1/12/2016) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/12/2016: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tfS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

CHARLES CLIFTON BEAL,

Case No. 15-cv-05378-SI

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

9
10

DEBORAH RYAN,

Re: Dkt. No. 1

Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Charles Clifton Beal, an inmate at the Santa Clara County Jail, has filed this pro se civil

14

rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his complaint, Beal alleges that he asked for a speedy

15

trial on July 24 or 29, 2015, and defendant Judge Deborah Ryan responded, “‘you don’t have the

16

rights. I am not doing it.’” Docket No. 1 at 3. His prayer for relief requests that he be released

17

from jail.

18

Beal’s complaint is now before the court for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which

19

requires the court to screen any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity

20

or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

21

cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim

22

upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from

23

such relief. See id. at § 1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v.

24

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

In its review the court must identify any

25

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that a

26

right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated and (2) that the

27

violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487

28

U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

1

Liberally construed, the complaint alleges that the defendant denied Beal his right to a

2

speedy trial. The complaint attacks the lawfulness of his custody, and specifically seeks his

3

release from jail as the only remedy. “Habeas is the exclusive remedy . . . for the prisoner who

4

seeks ‘immediate or speedier release’ from confinement.” Skinner v. Switzer, 562 U.S. 521, 524

5

(2011) (quoting Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 82 (2005)); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475,

6

500 (1973). Beal’s complaint under § 1983 therefore must be dismissed because his claim can

7

proceed, if at all, only in a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The proper disposition of a civil

8

rights complaint seeking habeas relief is a dismissal without prejudice to the prisoner bringing it as

9

a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 586 (9th Cir.

10

1995).

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

A petitioner may challenge his pretrial detention on state criminal charges by way of a

12

petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. However, principles of comity and

13

federalism require that this court abstain and not entertain any such pretrial habeas challenge

14

unless petitioner shows that: (1) he has exhausted available state judicial remedies, and (2)

15

“special circumstances” warrant federal intervention. Carden v. Montana, 626 F.2d 82, 83-84 (9th

16

Cir. 1980). Only in cases of proven harassment or prosecutions undertaken by state officials in

17

bad faith without hope of obtaining a valid conviction and perhaps in other special circumstances

18

where irreparable injury can be shown is federal injunctive relief against pending state

19

prosecutions appropriate. Id. at 84 (citing Perez v. Ledesma, 401 U.S. 82, 85 (1971)); e.g., id.

20

(speedy trial claim is preferably reviewed after trial).

21

For the foregoing reasons, this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Beal

22

filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus. He may file a petition for writ of habeas corpus if he

23

ever is convicted, but may only file that petition after he exhausts state court remedies for each

24

claim he wishes to present in a federal habeas petition. He also may file a pretrial petition for writ

25

of habeas corpus before he is convicted, but only after he exhausts state court remedies for each

26

claim he wishes to present and demonstrates special circumstances warranting federal intervention

27
28
2

1

before the conclusion of his state court criminal proceedings.

2

The clerk shall close the file.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6

Dated: January 12, 2016
______________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3