Bolin v. State of California et al

Filing 10

ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton finding as moot 7 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages; finding as moot 8 Motion (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (nahS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/24/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

OAKLAND DIVISION

6
7

PAUL C. BOLIN,
Plaintiff,

8
9

vs.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et. al.,

11
For the Northern District of California

10

United States District Court

No. C 14-4087 PJH (PR)

Defendants.
/

12
Plaintiff, a condemned prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, has filed a pro se civil
13
rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has been granted leave to proceed in forma
14
pauperis. Plaintiff filed this case in the United States District Court for the District of
15
Columbia which transferred the case to this court. However, court records indicate that
16
plaintiff filed nearly the exact same complaint in this court in case No. C 14-3609 PJH (PR).
17
The court dismissed case No. C 14-3609 PJH (PR) for failure to state a claim. Both cases
18
involve the procedures and length of time for litigating death penalty cases in state and
19
federal court in California. In case No. C 14-3609 PJH (PR) plaintiff was seeking money
20
damages from his court appointed attorneys and his federal habeas action is still pending in
21
another court.
22
While this case contains the same allegations and the same legal arguments, it
23
names different defendants, the State of California, Governor Brown, and Attorney General
24
Harris. Plaintiff seeks money damages and essentially to declare the death penalty invalid.
25
The court also notes that plaintiff has filed several cases in this and other districts regarding
26
the procedures and length of death penalty cases. See, e.g., Bolin v. Brown, No. 1:12-cv27
0077 LJO GSA (E.D. Cal. Aug., 23 2012), affirmed in Bolin v. Brown, No. 12-17079 (9th
28
Cir. Sep. 9, 2013); Bolin v. Chappell, No. 1:13-cv-0498 LJO (E.D. Cal., July 19, 2013), writ

1

of mandamus denied in Bolin v. Chappell, No. 13-72462 (9th Cir July, 7, 2014). This action

2

is dismissed for the same reasons set forth in case No. C 14-3609 PJH (PR), Bolin v.

3

Brown, No. 1:12-cv-0077 LJO GSA (E.D. Cal. Aug., 23 2012), and Bolin v. Chappell, No.

4

1:13-cv-0498 LJO (E.D. Cal., July 19, 2013). To the extent plaintiff seeks to challenge his

5

conviction, his federal habeas petition is proceeding in another court where he is

6

represented by counsel. To the extent plaintiff seeks money damages arising from his

7

conviction, that claim is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), as has been

8

explained in prior cases and appeals brought by plaintiff.

9

CONCLUSION
1. This action is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

2. Plaintiff’s motions to file additional exhibits and to withdraw the complaint (Docket

12

Nos. 7, 8) are DENIED as moot.

13

3. The Clerk shall close this case.

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

Dated: September 24, 2014.
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

16
17

G:\PRO-SE\PJH\CR.14\Bolin4087.dis.wpd

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2