Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00308/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00308-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

4

decision to grant, deny or revoke parole.") 

If plaintiff wishes to challenge his criminal conviction, he may file a petition for writ of habeas

corpus in federal court, Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973), but not until he exhausts state

judicial remedies, Granberry v. Greer, 481 U.S. 129, 134 (1987). To exhaust his state judicial remedies,

he must present each of his claims to the California Supreme Court, for example in a direct appeal or

by a state petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Because any action for damages must be dismissed under Heck and any challenge to the criminal

conviction must be by way of direct appeal or a habeas petition, this action will be dismissed. This

dismissal is without prejudice to plaintiff filing a civil action for damages concerning his conviction and

trial but not unless and until his conviction has been set aside. 

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend. [Docket No. 14].

Because he cannot show any likelihood of success on the merits, his “Additional Temporary

Injunctions” are also DENIED. [Docket Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18]. Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma

pauperis is DENIED. [Docket No. 3]. The clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 15, 2007 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00308-SI Document 19 Filed 05/15/07 Page 1 of 1