Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-06007/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-06007-0/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PEDRO CRUZ HERNANDEZ, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

F. GONZALEZ, Warden,

Respondent(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 09-6007 CRB (PR)

ORDER

(Docket # 7 & 8)

Petitioner, a prisoner at the California Correctional Institution, filed a pro se

petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the order of

restitution issued in connection with his criminal conviction in the Superior Court of the

State of California in and for the County of Monterey. 

Per order filed on January 13, 2010, the court noted that petitioner's direct appeal

(case # H033701) is still pending in the California Court of Appeal and therefore

dismissed the federal petition without prejudice to refiling after all pending state postconviction proceedings are completed. 

Petitioner has filed an "objection" (docket # 7) and a request for a response

(docket # 8) which the court construes as a motion for reconsideration and DENIES for

lack of merit. Moreover, the petition must be dismissed because the Ninth Circuit

recently held that federal courts lack habeas jurisdiction where, as here, the petitioner

Case 3:09-cv-06007-CRB Document 9 Filed 04/29/10 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

27

28 2

challenges only the money portion of a sentence that includes imprisonment. See Bailey

v. Hill, No. 09-35450, slip op. 4859, 4868 (9th Cir. Mar. 25, 2010) ((imprisoned

petitioner failed to satisfy custody requirement for his petition challenging only the

restitution component of his sentence because the "elimination or alteration of a money

judgment, does not directly impact – and is not directed at the source of the restraint

on–his liberty" as long as he has to serve the rest of his prison sentence in the same

manner).

SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 28, 2010 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\CRB\HC.09\Hernandez, P1.recon.wpd

Case 3:09-cv-06007-CRB Document 9 Filed 04/29/10 Page 2 of 2