Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05096/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05096-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLITOS G. SAUCEDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

AUDREY KING, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-05096-JD 

ORDER OF TRANSFER

Plaintiff, a civil detainee, has filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He is 

civilly committed pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA). See Cal. Welf. 

& Inst. Code 6600, et seq. Plaintiff is committed in Coalinga, CA which is located in the Eastern 

District of California. The underlying commitment proceeding occurred in San Mateo County, 

which is in this district. 

Plaintiff claims that SVPA’s “assessment methodology” for predicting recidivism, and 

SVPA’s failure to provide sexually violent predators with outpatient treatment, are 

unconstitutional. Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief and an injunction preventing defendants – all 

current or former officials of California’s Department of State Hospitals (formerly known as the 

Department of Mental Health) – from holding civil detainees under SVPA until defendants are 

able to offer them outpatient treatment. 

“‘Federal law opens two main avenues to relief on complaints related to imprisonment: a 

petition for habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and a complaint under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 

Rev. Stat. § 1979, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Challenges to the lawfulness of confinement or 

to particulars affecting its duration are the province of habeas corpus.’” Hill v. McDonough, 547 

U.S. 573, 579 (2006) (quoting Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750 (2004)). “An inmate’s 

Case 3:14-cv-05096-JD Document 10 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 4
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

challenge to the circumstances of his confinement, however, may be brought under § 1983.” Id. 

Habeas is the “exclusive remedy” for the prisoner who seeks “‘immediate or speedier 

release’” from confinement. Skinner v. Switzer, 131 S. Ct. 1289, 1293 (2011) (quoting Wilkinson 

v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 82 (2005)); see Calderon v. Ashmus, 523 U.S. 740, 747 (1998); Edwards 

v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648 (1997); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). “Where the 

prisoner’s claim would not ‘necessarily spell speedier release,’ however, suit may be brought 

under § 1983.” Skinner, 131 S. Ct. at 1293 (quoting Wilkinson, 544 U.S. at 82). As a 

consequence, challenges to prison conditions traditionally have been cognizable only via § 1983, 

while challenges implicating the fact or duration of confinement must be brought through a habeas 

petition. Docken v. Chase, 393 F.3d 1024, 1026 (9th Cir. 2004). 

Although plaintiff is a civilly committed patient, rather than a criminally convicted 

prisoner, the habeas versus § 1983 proper remedy distinction also applies. Compare Hubbart v. 

Knapp, 379 F.3d 773, 779-81 (9th Cir. 2004) (upholding constitutionality of SVPA against habeas 

challenge under 28 U.S.C. § 2254) with Hydrick v. Hunter, 669 F.3d 937, 941-42 (9th Cir. 2012) 

(accepting defendants’ qualified immunity defense to civil committees’ § 1983 challenge to their 

conditions of confinement). Consequently, to the extent that plaintiff seeks relief that would 

entitle him to immediate or earlier release from his civil commitment, he must file a petition for a 

writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 after exhausting state judicial remedies. See 

Skinner, 131 S. Ct. at 1293; see also Nelson v. Sandritter, 351 F.2d 284, 285 (9th Cir. 1965) 

(constitutionality of state civil commitment proceedings may be challenged in federal habeas 

corpus after state judicial remedies have been exhausted). And to the extent that plaintiff seeks 

relief that may be construed as not necessarily requiring speedier release from his civil 

commitment, his § 1983 action must be brought in the Eastern District of California, where 

plaintiff is civilly committed at Coalinga State Hospital and where all named defendants reside. 

See 28 U.S.C. §§ 84(b), 1391(b).

Case 3:14-cv-05096-JD Document 10 Filed 03/09/15 Page 2 of 4
3

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

Northern District of California

This case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District 

of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). In view of the transfer, the Court will not rule upon 

plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2015

______________________________________

JAMES DONATO

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-05096-JD Document 10 Filed 03/09/15 Page 3 of 4
4

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLITOS G. SAUCEDO,

Plaintiff,

v.

AUDREY KING, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-05096-JD 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on 3/9/2015, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said 

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing 

said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle 

located in the Clerk's office.

Carlitos G. Saucedo ID: 1658-4

Coalinga State Hospital

PO Box 5003

Coalinga, CA 93210-5003 

Dated: 3/9/2015

Richard W. Wieking

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable JAMES DONATO

Case 3:14-cv-05096-JD Document 10 Filed 03/09/15 Page 4 of 4