Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01355/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01355-0/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

19cv1355 GPC (BGS)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NOEL RODRIGUEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

MONTGOMERY, Warden,

Respondent.

Case No.: 19cv1355 GPC (BGS)

ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION 

TO PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS; and (2) DISMISSING 

CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND 

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has submitted a Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma 

pauperis. 

MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Petitioner has $0.00 on account at the California correctional institution in which 

he is presently confined. Petitioner cannot afford the $5.00 filing fee. Thus, the Court 

GRANTS Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, and allows Petitioner to 

prosecute the above-referenced action without being required to prepay fees or costs and 

without being required to post security. The Clerk of the Court shall file the Petition for 

Writ of Habeas Corpus without prepayment of the filing fee.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:19-cv-01355-GPC-BGS Document 3 Filed 07/26/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

19cv1355 GPC (BGS)

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

FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM ON HABEAS CORPUS

Upon review of the Petition, it appears to the Court that a Petition for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus brought pursuant to § 2254 is not the proper vehicle for the claims 

Petitioner presents. Petitioner contends his federal constitutional rights are being violated 

by prison officials because he is not being given proper medical and psychiatric care. 

(Pet., ECF No. 1 at 18-21, 27-68.) Petitioner’s claims are not cognizable on habeas 

because they do not challenge the constitutional validity or duration of confinement. See

28 U.S.C. 2254(a); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973); Heck v. Humphrey, 

512 U.S. 477, 480-85 (1994). 

Challenges to the fact or duration of confinement are brought by petition for a writ 

of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254; challenges to conditions of confinement 

are brought pursuant to the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Preiser, 411 U.S. at 

488-500. When a state prisoner is challenging the very fact or duration of his physical 

imprisonment, and the relief he seeks is a determination that he is entitled to immediate 

release or a speedier release from that imprisonment, his sole federal remedy is a writ of 

habeas corpus. Id. at 500. On the other hand, a § 1983 action is a proper remedy for a 

state prisoner who is making a constitutional challenge to the conditions of his prison life, 

but not to the fact or length of his custody. Id. at 499; McIntosh v. United States Parole 

Comm’n, 115 F.3d 809, 811-12 (10th Cir. 1997). It appears that Petitioner challenges the 

conditions of his prison life, but not the fact or length of his custody. 

In no way does Petitioner claim his state court conviction violates the Constitution 

or laws or treaties of the United States. Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 

Cases provides for summary dismissal of a habeas petition “[i]f it plainly appears from 

the face of the petition and any exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to 

relief in the district court.” Rule 4, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. Here, it is plain from the 

petition that Petitioner is not presently entitled to federal habeas relief because he has not 

alleged that the state court violated his federal rights.

/ / /

Case 3:19-cv-01355-GPC-BGS Document 3 Filed 07/26/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

19cv1355 GPC (BGS)

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

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s request to proceed in 

forma pauperis. The Clerk of the Court will file the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

without prepayment of the filing fee. Further, the Court DISMISSES this case without 

prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim on habeas corpus. If Petitioner wishes to 

challenge the validity of his state court conviction, he must, no later than September 30, 

2019, file a First Amended Petition that states a cognizable habeas corpus claim. If 

Petitioner wishes to challenge the conditions of his confinement, he must file a new civil 

rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which will be given a new case number. 

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail Petitioner a blank prisoner forms packet 

containing a blank First Amended Petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and a blank 

civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 form together with a copy of this 

Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 26, 2019

Case 3:19-cv-01355-GPC-BGS Document 3 Filed 07/26/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3