Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01508/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01508-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCELINO CALDERON SILVA,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-03-1508 DFL GGH P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al., 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This action is proceeding on the original petition filed July

15, 2003. Petitioner challenges his April 10, 2001, conviction of a prison disciplinary for

distribution of narcotics (heroin). 

On February 2, 2005, the court ordered petitioner to show cause why this action

should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. On March 7, 2005, petitioner filed a response to

this order. In this response, petitioner states that on August 9, 2001, his rules violation was

ordered re-heard for the lesser offense of possession of heroin. Petitioner’s March 7, 2005,

pleading, exhibit B. The rehearing process did not begin until the Chief Disciplinary Officer

issued a memorandum on February 23, 2004, ordering the rehearing. Id., exhibit C. On April 14,

Case 2:03-cv-01508-DFL-GGH Document 18 Filed 04/26/05 Page 1 of 2
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

2

2004, petitioner was found guilty of the lesser offense. Id., exhibits C, D. 

The instant petition challenges a disciplinary conviction that has been discharged. 

The court cannot grant habeas relief as to a disciplinary conviction that is no longer valid. For

that reason, the petition is dismissed with leave to file an amended petition challenging the 2004

conviction for possession of heroin. If petitioner does not file an amended petition, the court will

recommend dismissal of this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The February 2, 2005, order to show cause is discharged;

2. The petition is dismissed with thirty days to file an amended petition

challenging petitioner’s 2004 conviction for possession of heroin; respondent’s response to the

amended petition is due thirty days thereafter; petitioner’s reply is due thirty days thereafter; if

petitioner does not file an amended petition, the court will recommend dismissal of this action. 

DATED: 4/26/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

sil1508.ord

Case 2:03-cv-01508-DFL-GGH Document 18 Filed 04/26/05 Page 2 of 2