Buzzard v. ISRB/CCB et al

Filing 53

ORDER rescinding 52 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton.**2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Ronald Buzzard, Prisoner ID: 846650)(DN) Modified on 5/5/2016 (DN).(copy emailed Ad Hoc to Court of Appeals)

1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8

RONALD BUZZARD, JR.,

CASE NO. C15-5874-RBL

9
Plaintiff,

ORDER REVOKING IFP STATUS

10
v.
11
ISRB/CCB,

DKT. #52

12
Defendant.
13
14

THIS MATTER is before the Court on referral from the Ninth Circuit to determine

15 whether Plaintiff Buzzard’s in forma pauperis status should continue on appeal [Dkt. #52].
16 Buzzard pled guilty to Rape of a Child in the First Degree. The Defendant Indeterminate
17 Sentence Review Board thrice denied him release from prison because he refused to participate
18 in a sex offender treatment program. When Buzzard agreed to participate, the Board found him
19 releasable.
20

Buzzard sued the Board and its (former and current) members under 42 U.S.C. § 1983,

21 alleging its denials were retaliatory. The Court granted him in forma pauperis status [Dkt. #6].
22 The Board moved to dismiss his complaint [Dkt. #22], which Magistrate Judge Strombom
23 recommended the Court grant [Dkt. #40]. She also recommended that the Court deny Buzzard’s
24

ORDER REVOKING IFP STATUS - 1

1 motion for a temporary restraining order as moot. The Court adopted her Report and
2 Recommendation [Dkt. #44] because Buzzard cannot sue the Board under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and
3 its members are entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity.
4

“An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it

5 is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American Airlines, 302
6 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of forma pauperis status is appropriate where district
7 court finds the appeal to be frivolous). The Court must determine whether Buzzard’s appeal is
8 frivolous or malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C.
9 §1915(e)(2)(B)(i)&(ii).
10

No cognizable legal theory can sustain Buzzard’s claims against the Board or its

11 members. The Board is not a person under § 1983, and parole board members are entitled to
12 absolute immunity for parole board decisions. See Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491
13 U.S. 58, 109 S. Ct. 2304 (1989) (an entity with Eleventh Amendment immunity is not a “person”
14 within the meaning of § 1983); see also Brown v. Cal. Dep’t of Corr., 554 F.3d 747, 751 (9th
15 Cir. 2009) (parole board members are entitled to immunity). Because Buzzard fails to state a
16 claim upon which relief may be granted, the Court REVOKES his in forma pauperis status.
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

Dated this 5th day of May, 2016.

20

A

21

Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

19

22
23
24

DKT. #52 - 2