Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01447/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01447-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

HAROLD L. ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1447 LKK GGH P

vs.

SHASTA COUNTY PROBATION, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 14, 2007, the court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. 

On March 14, 2007, petitioner filed an amended habeas corpus petition.

In the February 14, 2007, order, the court stated that if plaintiff was seeking the

reversal of his conviction, he must file a petition for writ of habeas corpus. In the amended

petition, plaintiff states that he is not seeking the reversal of his conviction. 

Although plaintiff’s claims are difficult to understand, it appears that he is

claiming that prison officials at High Desert State Prison are improperly deducting money from

his trust account to pay the restitution fine imposed in his criminal case. Plaintiff appears to

argue that the money in his trust account is exempt from deduction because it is from a federal

disability payment. Plaintiff may also be arguing that the money in his trust account is exempt

Case 2:06-cv-01447-LKK -GGH Document 23 Filed 04/12/07 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

from deduction to pay his restitution fine for some other reason. 

If the court has correctly interpreted plaintiff’s claim, he must refile his claim on a

form for a civil rights complaint. Plaintiff must identify the individuals in the Trust Office

responsible for the alleged deprivation. Plaintiff must clearly state why the Trust Office is not

authorized to deduct the money from his account. If plaintiff is arguing that the restitution fine

was wrongly imposed as part of his sentence by the state court, then he must file a habeas corpus

petition in a separate action. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The amended petition filed March 14, 2007, is dismissed; plaintiff is granted

thirty days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint on the form provided by the

court;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff the form for a civil rights

complaint by a prisoner.

DATED: 4/12/07 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

arm1447.ord

Case 2:06-cv-01447-LKK -GGH Document 23 Filed 04/12/07 Page 2 of 2