Hamilton v. Rodriguez et al

Filing 6

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Amended Complaint due by 2/7/2013. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/7/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2013)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

OAKLAND DIVISION

6
7

EUGENE LAMAR HAMILTON,
Plaintiff,

8
vs.

9

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
LEAVE TO AMEND

T. RODRIGUEZ, et. al.,
Defendants.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C 12-4697 PJH (PR)

/
12
Plaintiff, an inmate at Salinas Valley State Prison, has filed a pro se civil rights
13
complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has been granted leave to proceed in forma
14
pauperis.
15
DISCUSSION
16
A.

Standard of Review

17
Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners
18
seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
19
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and
20
dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may
21
be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at
22
1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police
23
Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).
24
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of
25
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not necessary;
26
the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim is and the
27
grounds upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations
28
omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed factual

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

(citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is

6

plausible on its face." Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has recently explained

7

the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can provide the

8

framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations. When there are

9

well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine
whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

1937, 1950 (2009).

12

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential

13

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was

14

violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the

15

color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

16

B.

17

Legal Claims
Plaintiff has filed three complaints in this action, and the court has screened the

18

most recent complaint. Docket No. 4. Plaintiff names approximately twenty defendants

19

and states that they planted inmate manufactured weapons in plaintiff’s wheelchair and

20

then conspired to have plaintiff found guilty at a disciplinary hearing. As a result of the

21

guilty finding, plaintiff states he was assessed a twelve month loss of time credits. Petition

22

at 14, 36, 40. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and expungement of the disciplinary

23

finding from his record.

24

This claim appears to be barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). In

25

Heck the United States Supreme Court held that in order to recover damages for an

26

allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions

27

whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a plaintiff must prove

28

that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive
2

1

order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called

2

into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. Id. at 486-487. A

3

claim for damages arising from a conviction or sentence that has not been so invalidated is

4

not cognizable under section 1983. Id. Heck has been extended to prison disciplinary

5

hearings where time credits were affected. Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648 (1997)

6

When a state prisoner seeks damages in a section 1983 suit, the district court must
consider whether a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of

8

his continued confinement; if it would, the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff

9

can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated. Id. at 487.

10

It does not appear this disciplinary finding has been invalidated, so this claim must

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

7

be dismissed, though plaintiff will be provided an opportunity to demonstrate the reversal of

12

the finding. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 585 (9th Cir. 1995) (claims

13

barred by Heck may be dismissed sua sponte without prejudice).

14

CONCLUSION

15

1. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend in accordance with the

16

standards set forth above. The amended complaint must be filed no later than February 7,

17

2013, and must include the caption and civil case number used in this order and the words

18

AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an amended complaint completely

19

replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must include in it all the claims he wishes to

20

present. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). He may not

21

incorporate material from the original complaint by reference. Failure to amend within the

22

designated time will result in the dismissal of these claims.

23

2. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the

24

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

25

“Notice of Change of Address,” and must comply with the court's orders in a timely fashion.

26

Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to

27

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

28

///
3

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 7, 2013.
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

3
4

G:\PRO-SE\PJH\CR.12\Hamilton4697.dwlta.wpd

5
6
7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4