Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02800/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02800-1/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

MARK A. SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-2800 GGH P

vs.

DORA M. RIOS,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is civilly committed to a state hospital and purports to have filed an

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule

72-302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit making the showing required by 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a)(1). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. 

The determination that plaintiff may proceed in forma pauperis does not complete

the required inquiry. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the court is directed to dismiss the case

at any time if it determines the allegation of poverty is untrue, or the action is frivolous or

malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against

an immune defendant. The court cannot make this determination on the present record. 

Case 2:09-cv-02800-FCD-GGH Document 9 Filed 02/25/10 Page 1 of 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

2

Therefore, the court reserves decision on these issues until the record is sufficiently developed. 

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact. 

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28

(9th Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an

indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke,

490 U.S. at 327. The critical inquiry is whether a constitutional claim, however inartfully

pleaded, has an arguable legal and factual basis. See Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th

Cir. 1989); Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1227.

A complaint must contain more than a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a

cause of action;” it must contain factual allegations sufficient to “raise a right to relief above the

speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965 (2007). 

“The pleading must contain something more...than...a statement of facts that merely creates a

suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action.” Id., quoting 5 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal

Practice and Procedure 1216, pp. 235-235 (3d ed. 2004). “[A] complaint must contain sufficient

factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft

v. Iqbal, ___ U.S.___, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127

S.Ct. 1955). “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows

the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct

alleged.” Id.

Pro se pleadings are liberally construed. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,

520-21, 92 S. Ct. 594, 595-96 (1972); Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th

Cir. 1988). Unless it is clear that no amendment can cure the defects of a complaint, a pro se

plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is entitled to notice and an opportunity to amend before

dismissal. See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987); Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1230.

Plaintiff alleges that defendant Dora M. Rios, his “public defender conflict

attorney,” refused to confer with plaintiff in preparing his defense. Complaint, p. 3. Plaintiff

Case 2:09-cv-02800-FCD-GGH Document 9 Filed 02/25/10 Page 2 of 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

 At most, plaintiff may be civilly committed (pursuant to a single commitment) for a 1

period of two years “for appropriate treatment and confinement in a secure facility.” Jones v.

Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 923 (9 Cir. 2004), citing Cal. Welf & Inst. Code § 6604. th

3

faults his attorney for failing to conduct an investigation or to subpoena witnesses or present

exculpatory evidence. He claims that she provided ineffective assistance of counsel and he seeks

his release and a new trial. Complaint, p. 3.

Plaintiff’s filing is inapposite for a number of reasons. In the first place, plaintiff

makes clear that he is a civil detainee pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act

(SVPA) (Cal. Welf & Inst. Code § 6600, et seq.), although he claims to be under a sentence of

“indefinite life.” Id., at 3, 10. If plaintiff is civilly detained, he is not serving a life sentence, or,

in fact, any prison sentence.1

In the second place, the Civil Rights Act under which this action was filed

provides as follows:

Every person who, under color of [state law] . . . subjects, or causes

to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the

deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the

Constitution . . . shall be liable to the party injured in an action at

law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. A public defender is not a state actor within the meaning of § 1983 in

representing a client in the traditional adversarial role of a lawyer. Miranda v. Clark County,

Nevada, 319 F.3d 465, 468 (9 Cir. 2003), citing Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 325, 102 th

S. Ct. 445 (1981).

Third, if plaintiff is seeking to challenge the constitutionality of his current

commitment and wishes to raise a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, he must proceed as

a petitioner by way of a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Plaintiff’s

complaint will be dismissed, but plaintiff will be granted leave to amend. Plaintiff will be

provided with the form for filing a civil rights action and the form for filing a petition pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Case 2:09-cv-02800-FCD-GGH Document 9 Filed 02/25/10 Page 3 of 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

4

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 

2. The complaint is dismissed for the reasons discussed above, with leave to

submit an amended filing, in the form of either an amended complaint or a petition for writ of

habeas corpus, within twenty-eight days from the date of service of this order. Failure to comply

with this order will result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide plaintiff with the appropriate

form for filing a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the form for filing a habeas

petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

DATED: February 25, 2010

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

smit2800.b

Case 2:09-cv-02800-FCD-GGH Document 9 Filed 02/25/10 Page 4 of 4