Free Order Dismissing Case - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-02727-RMW

Document 3

Filed 06/07/2007

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK WILSON,

) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) ) MEDICAL CARE FOR CALIFORNIA ) DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ) ) Respondent. ) )

No. C 07-2727 RMW (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas
18

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his medical care and treatment during
19

his incarceration at San Quentin State Prison.
20

The Supreme Court has declined to address whether a challenge to a condition of
21

confinement may be brought under habeas. See Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 526 n.6
22

(1979); Fierro v. Gomez, 77 F.3d 301, 304 n.2 (9th Cir.), vacated on other grounds, 519
23

U.S. 918 (1996). However, the Ninth Circuit has held that "habeas jurisdiction is absent,
24

and a § 1983 action proper, where a successful challenge to a prison condition will not
25

necessarily shorten the prisoner's sentence." Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 859
26

(9th Cir. 2003) (implying that claim, which if successful would "necessarily" or "likely"
27

accelerate the prisoner's release on parole, must be brought in a habeas petition).
28
Order of Dismissal P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\hc.07\Wilson727disrem

1

Case 5:07-cv-02727-RMW

Document 3

Filed 06/07/2007

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The preferred practice in the Ninth Circuit has been that challenges to conditions of confinement should be brought in a civil rights complaint. See Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (civil rights action is proper method of challenging conditions of confinement); Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891-92 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1979) (affirming dismissal of habeas petition on basis that challenges to terms and conditions of confinement must be brought in civil rights complaint). Accordingly, the court will dismiss the instant habeas action without prejudice because petitioner's claims do not challenge the duration or legality of his confinement or sentence under § 2254. Petitioner's claims are more appropriately addressed in a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court notes that petitioner has a pending civil rights action, case no. C 07-2728 RMW (PR), challenging his medical care and treatment at San Quentin State Prison. CONCLUSION The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk shall terminate any pending motions and close the file. No filing fee is due. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 6/6/2007 /s/ Ronald M. Whyte RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

Order of Dismissal P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\hc.07\Wilson727disrem

2

Case 5:07-cv-02727-RMW

Document 3

Filed 06/07/2007

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

This is to certify that on 6/7/2007 ruling was mailed to the following: Patrick Wilson T-50230 San Quentin State Prison San Quentin, CA 94974

, a copy of this

Order of Dismissal P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\hc.07\Wilson727disrem

3