Hooker v. California Department of Correction Rehabilitation et al

Filing 3

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 11/2/16. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MAURICE W. HOOKER, Petitioner, United States District Court Northern District of California 11 v. 12 13 ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE M. SPEARMAN, Warden, Respondent. 14 15 Case No. 16-cv-04432-DMR (PR) This case was commenced when Petitioner filed a document captioned “Petition For A 16 Writ of Habeas Corpus.” Dkt. 1.1 Petitioner also seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis, which 17 will be granted below. Dkt. 2. 18 19 Petitioner has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. Dkt. 1 at 7. Therefore, this matter has been assigned to the undersigned Magistrate Judge. 20 The instant petition does not challenge either the fact of Petitioner’s conviction or the 21 length of his sentence. Rather, it pertains to the conditions of Petitioner’s confinement. Such 22 claims are typically presented in a civil rights action. See Moran v. Sondalle, 218 F.3d 647, 650- 23 52 (7th Cir. 2000); Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (civil rights action is proper 24 method of challenging conditions of confinement); Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891-92 & n.1 25 26 27 28 1 Petitioner previously filed a habeas corpus action challenging his 2008 conviction in the Santa Clara County Superior Court, which is in the venue of the Northern District of California. See Case No. C 11-01652 SBA (PR). On July 16, 2014, Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong denied his federal habeas petition as to all claims, and issued the judgment. See Dkts. 13, 14 in Case No. C 11-01652 SBA (PR). 1 (9th Cir. 1979) (affirming dismissal of habeas petition on basis that challenges to terms and 2 conditions of confinement must be brought in civil rights complaint). The Supreme Court has declined to address whether a challenge to a condition of 3 4 confinement may be brought under habeas. See Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 526 n.6 (1979); 5 Fierro v. Gomez, 77 F.3d 301, 304 n.2 (9th Cir.), vacated on other grounds, 519 U.S. 918 (1996). 6 However, the Ninth Circuit has held that a habeas action is an improper vehicle to address claims 7 based on the prisoner’s conditions of confinement. Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 859 (9th 8 Cir. 2003) (“habeas jurisdiction is absent, and a § 1983 action proper, where a successful 9 challenge to a prison condition will not necessarily shorten the prisoner’s sentence.”). A district court may construe a habeas petition attacking conditions of confinement as a 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, see Wilwording v. Swenson, 404 U.S. 249, 251 (1971), 12 but is not required to do so. Since the Wilwording case, there have been notable changes in the 13 law. For instance, the filing fee for a habeas petition is $5.00; if leave to proceed in forma 14 pauperis is granted, the fee is forgiven. In civil rights cases, however, the applicable fee is 15 $400.00. Under the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act, the prisoner is required to pay the entire 16 amount. Even if granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the prisoner must still pay the 17 $350.00 filing fee (though not the $50.00 administrative fee), by way of deductions from his or her 18 prisoner account. In addition, the pleading forms applicable to habeas actions are different than 19 for a civil rights action. Thus, information that is important in a civil rights case (such as whether 20 the prisoner fully exhausted his claims) is not included in a habeas form petition. Given these 21 distinctions, the court finds that the preferable course of action is to dismiss the action without 22 prejudice to Petitioner filing a civil rights action if he wishes to do so in light of the above. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the instant action is DISMISSED without prejudice to 24 25 refiling as a civil rights action. Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is 26 GRANTED. Dkt. 2. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment, terminate all pending motions, and close the 27 28 file. 2 1 2 3 4 The Clerk shall also send Petitioner a blank civil rights form and the court’s prisoner in forma pauperis application form along with his copy of this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 2, 2016 5 DONNA M. RYU United States Magistrate Judge 6 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 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 MAURICE W. HOOKER, Case No. 4:16-cv-04432-DMR Plaintiff, 5 v. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 6 7 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION REHABILITATION, et al., Defendants. 8 9 10 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 16 That on November 2, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, blank Civil Rights form and In Forma Pauperis Application Form 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. 17 18 19 Maurice W. Hooker ID: V-17290 High Desert State Prison P.O. BOX 3030 Susanville, CA 96127-3030 20 21 Dated: November 2, 2016 22 23 Susan Y. Soong Clerk, United States District Court 24 25 26 27 28 By:________________________ Ivy Lerma Garcia, Deputy Clerk to the Honorable DONNA M. RYU 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?