Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04224/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04224-0/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEPHEN R. CRUMP, 

Plaintiff(s),

 vs.

ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR

COURT, et al.,

Defendant(s).

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-4224 CRB (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

(Doc # 2)

Plaintiff, a prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, has filed a pro se civil

rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages for allegedly

unconstitutional criminal conviction and imprisonment. Plaintiff also seeks to

proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which

prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a

governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable

claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint

"is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,"

or "seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief." Id. §

1915A(b). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed, however. Balistreri v.

Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).
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

 

1And to whatever extent plaintiff seeks to challenge either the fact or

duration of his confinement, his sole remedy is to file a petition for writ of habeas

2

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two 

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States

was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting

under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

B. Legal Claims

In order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or

imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would

render a conviction or sentence invalid, a § 1983 plaintiff must prove that the

conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive

order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or

called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. Heck

v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). A claim for damages bearing that

relationship to a conviction or sentence that has not been so invalidated is not

cognizable under § 1983. Id. at 487.

When a state prisoner seeks damages in a § 1983 suit, the district court

must therefore consider whether a judgment in favor of the plaintiff would

necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence; if it would, the

complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the

conviction or sentence has already been invalidated. See id. A judgment in favor

of the plaintiff here would imply the invalidity of a state conviction which has not

already been invalidated. The instant allegations therefore fail to state a cognizable

claim under § 1983 and must be DISMISSED without prejudice. See Edwards v.

Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 649 (1997); Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583,

585 (9th Cir. 1995). 1
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

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

Calderon v. Ashmus, 523 U.S. 740, 747 (1998). Any such claim therefore is

dismissed without prejudice. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d at 586. 

3

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis

(doc # 2) is DENIED and the instant allegations are DISMISSED without prejudice

to reasserting them in a new complaint if a cause of action accrues.

The clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this order, terminate all

pending motions as moot and close the file.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 26, 2005 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge