Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00577/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00577-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEAN C. DRAKE, 

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-0577 DFL KJM P

vs.

FELKER, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER AND

 / FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma

pauperis.

Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable

to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be

granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

In his petition, petitioner challenges prison disciplinary proceedings which

resulted in a change in petitioner’s conditions of confinement. This is not a valid habeas

challenge. A petition for writ of habeas corpus can be entertained by this court only if petitioner

alleges he is actually in custody in violation of his Constitutional rights. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). 

/////

Case 2:07-cv-00577-JKS Document 4 Filed 04/06/07 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

1

 It appears petitioner might be able to bring an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before

deciding whether to file a § 1983 action, petitioner should review Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472

(1995). Also, petitioner is advised that if he files a § 1983 action he will be required to pay the $350

filing fee at least on an installment basis. 

2

Petitioner makes no such allegation here. Therefore, the court will recommend that this action

be dismissed.1

 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s

application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas

corpus be dismissed.

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within

twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file

written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Findings

and Recommendations." Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified

time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: April 5, 2007. 

1

drak0577.frs

Case 2:07-cv-00577-JKS Document 4 Filed 04/06/07 Page 2 of 2