Johnson v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al

Filing 8

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge James Donato on 11/16/16. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DERRICK L. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 3, 6
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No.16-cv-04513-JD

Defendants.

12
13

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
DISCUSSION

14
15

STANDARD OF REVIEW

16

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

17

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

18

§ 1915A(a). In its review, the Court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims

19

which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek

20

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se

21

pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th

22

Cir. 1990).

23

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

24

claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Although a complaint “does not need detailed

25

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

26

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

27

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

28

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

1

omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its

2

face.” Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has explained the “plausible on its face”

3

standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they

4

must be supported by factual allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court

5

should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement

6

to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).

7

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

8

the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the alleged deprivation was

9

committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).
LEGAL CLAIMS

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Plaintiff seeks money damages from the judge involved with his criminal case and to be

12

released from prison. In order to recover damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or

13

imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction

14

or sentence invalid, a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has

15

been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal

16

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

17

writ of habeas corpus. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-487 (1994). A claim for damages

18

bearing that relationship to a conviction or sentence that has not been so invalidated is not

19

cognizable under § 1983. Id. at 487.

20

A state judge is absolutely immune from civil liability for damages for acts performed in

21

his judicial capacity. See Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-55 (1967) (applying judicial

22

immunity to actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Judicial immunity is an immunity from suit for

23

damages, not just from an ultimate assessment of damages. See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511,

24

526 (1985).

25

Before plaintiff may seek damages, he must first demonstrate that his conviction has been

26

reversed or invalidated. Plaintiff has also failed to demonstrate that he is entitled to damages from

27

the judge. This case is dismissed without leave to amend because allowing further amendment

28

would be futile. Should plaintiff’s conviction be reversed he may refile this case. To the extent
2

1

plaintiff seeks to be released from prison, he must file a habeas petition after exhausting state court

2

remedies.
CONCLUSION

3
4
5

1.

This action is DISMISSED for the reasons set forth above. Plaintiff’s motions

(Docket Nos. 3, 6) are DENIED.

6

2.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

The Clerk shall close this file.

Dated: November 16, 2016

9
10
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

DERRICK L. JOHNSON,

Case No. 16-cv-04513-JD

Plaintiff,
5
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

6
7
8
9
10

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

That on November 16, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by
placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18

Derrick L. Johnson ID: AY7574
Salinas Valley State Prison
P.O. Box 705
Soledad, CA 93960

19
20
21

Dated: November 16, 2016

22
23

Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable JAMES DONATO

28
4