Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01345/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01345-0/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

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK WILLIAMS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

)

)

GOVERNMENT CLAIMS BOARD, et )

al., )

)

Respondent. )

)

)

___________________________________ )

1:07-CV-1345-LJO WMW HC

ORDER DISMISSING

PETITION WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se on a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254. This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas

corpus “in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the

ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United

States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). A habeas corpus petition is the correct method for a prisoner to

challenge “the very fact or duration of his confinement,” and where “the relief he seeks is a

determination that he is entitled to immediate release or a speedier release from that

Case 1:07-cv-01345-LJO-WMW Document 2 Filed 11/29/07 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

27

28 2

imprisonment.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489 (1973). In contrast, a civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is the proper method for a prisoner to challenge the

conditions of that confinement. In this case, Petitioner bases his claim on the medical care he

received while incarcerated snf expressly states that jurisdiction is based on 42 U.S.C. The

court finds, therefore, that Petitioner is not challenging his conviction, but rather is

challenging prison conditions. Accordingly, the proper vehicle for Petitioner to pursue his

claims is through a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1) The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice to Petitioner’s

right to file an appropriate civil rights action; and 

2) The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this

case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 29, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01345-LJO-WMW Document 2 Filed 11/29/07 Page 2 of 2