Brooks v. Allen

Filing 5

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/6/16. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

15
16

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Petitioner,

13
14

No. C 16-02634 RS (PR)

CHARLES ANTHONY BROOKS,

v.
KEVIN ALLEN,
Respondent.
/

17
18

This federal action was filed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, that is, as a

19

challenge to the lawfulness or duration of petitioner’s incarceration. A review of the petition,

20

however, shows that petitioner seeks money damages from various persons for allegedly

21

violating his constitutional rights. Therefore, if petitioner prevails here it will not affect the

22

length of his incarceration. This means that his claim is not the proper subject of a habeas

23

action, but must be brought as a civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Badea v. Cox,

24

931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (habeas corpus action proper mechanism for challenging

25

“legality or duration” of confinement; civil rights action proper method for challenging

26

conditions of confinement); Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891–92 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1979)

27

(affirming dismissal of habeas petition on basis that challenges to terms and conditions of

28
No. C 16-02634 RS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

1
2

confinement must be brought in civil rights complaint).
In an appropriate case a habeas petition may be construed as a section 1983 complaint.

3

Wilwording v. Swenson, 404 U.S. 249, 251 (1971). Although the Court may construe a

4

habeas petition as a civil rights action, it is not required to do so. Since the time when the

5

Wilwording case was decided there have been significant changes in the law. For instance,

6

the filing fee for a habeas petition is five dollars; for civil rights cases, however, the fee is

7

now $4001 and under the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act the prisoner is required to pay it,

8

even if granted in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status, by way of deductions from income to the

9

prisoner’s trust account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). A prisoner who might be willing to file a

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

habeas petition for which he or she would not have to pay a filing fee might feel otherwise

11

about a civil rights complaint for which the $400 fee would be deducted from income to his

12

or her prisoner account. Also, a civil rights complaint which is dismissed as malicious,

13

frivolous, or for failure to state a claim would count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g),

14

which is not true for habeas cases.

15

In view of these potential pitfalls for petitioner if the Court were to construe the

16

petition as a civil rights complaint, the case is DISMISSED without prejudice to petitioner

17

filing a civil rights action if he wishes to do so in light of the above.

18
19
20
21

Petitioner’s motion to proceed IFP (Docket No. 4) is GRANTED. The Clerk shall
terminate Docket No. 4, enter judgment in favor of respondent, and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 6, 2016
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

If granted IFP status, the total fee is $350.00.
2

No. C 16-02634 RS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL