Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03475/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03475-0/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)

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PETER CHARLES BULLETTI,

Petitioner,

 v.

A.P. KANE, et al., 

Respondents.

____________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-3475 JSW (PR)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

AND DENYING APPLICATION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

(Docket no. 2)

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at Soledad Correctional Training Facility,

filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the United States

District Court for the Southern District of California. The petition and Petitioner’s motion

to proceed in forma pauperis were transferred to this Court on August 26, 2005. On

September 22, 2005, the Clerk of Court assigned a second case number for this petition,

C05-3836 JSW (PR), which is administratively closed by separate order. Petitioner paid

the filing fee on September 30, 2005. His motion to proceed in forma pauperis is

therefore DENIED as moot (docket no. 2).

Petitioner previously filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court on

April 21, 2004 (C04-1552 JSW (PR)). On November 17, 2004, the Court dismissed that

petition as untimely. 

In the present petition, Petitioner claims that his incarceration has hindered his

ability to effectively file personal injury actions. However, Petitioner’s claims do not

involve the fact or duration of his confinement, hence they are not the proper subject of a

habeas action. See Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891-92 (9th Cir. 1979). In fact,

Petitioner states that his “civil action for personal injury against Black & Decker (U.S.)
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

2

Inc./Home Depot U.S.A. Inc. is not related in any way to Petitioner’s criminal

conviction.” (Pet., 6.B.) This case is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice for failure

to state a cognizable claim for habeas relief. The Clerk shall close the file and enter

judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 28, 2005 _________________________

JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge