Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01729/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01729-11/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

JESSE T. MOTEN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-1729 GEB DAD P

vs.

JAMES GOMEZ, 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 May 22, 2006, the court filed findings and recommendations

recommending that this action be dismissed with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a

claim. Plaintiff filed objections and the findings and recommendations are pending review by the

District Judge. Before the court is plaintiff document styled, “Petition For Writ Of

Mandate/Prohibition,” in which he contends that his placement and retention in administrative

segregation housing is “unjust,” and that his placement and retention violates state regulations

and his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. (Petition at 1, 4.) Plaintiff makes

the following request.

1. That this court, on hearing this petition and on consideration to

any return filed thereto, issue it’s peremptory writ of mandate

commanding respondent to “expeditiously” release petition from

Case 2:03-cv-01729-GEB-DAD Document 49 Filed 09/18/06 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

administrative segregation housing, too [sic] not falsely [enhance]

after petitioner’s custody status [as 270, not to 180], and to be

[re]housed into “General Population” Facility 3A, yard of origin at

Corcoran, or, to show cause before this court at a time specified

why it has not done so and why a peremptory writ should not be

issued, and/also, STAY all adverse actions pending fully court

review, and eradicate recommended transfer pending a 260(c)

hearing of facts;

(Id. at 8.)

The petition will be placed in the file and disregarded. Plaintiff is also advised

that when a prisoner challenges the fact or duration of his custody and a determination of his

action may result in plaintiff's entitlement to an earlier release, his sole federal remedy is a writ of

habeas corpus. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973); Young v. Kenny, 907 F.2d 874

(9th Cir. 1990). The proper mechanism for raising a federal challenge to conditions of

confinement is through a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Badea v. Cox, 931

F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991). Because plaintiff is confined at Corcoran State Prison, he is

advised that if he wishes to pursue relief in the federal courts with respect to the matters he refers

to in his recent filing, he must file either a civil rights action or a habeas petition with the Fresno

Division of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s July 28, 2006 petition for writ of mandate shall be placed in the file

and disregarded; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide plaintiff with the court’s form

complaint for a § 1983 civil rights action and the form petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

DATED: September 15, 2006.

DAD:4

mote1729.wom

Case 2:03-cv-01729-GEB-DAD Document 49 Filed 09/18/06 Page 2 of 2