Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_10-cv-01442/USCOURTS-cand-4_10-cv-01442-0/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)

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

MATTHEW MARK KOZLOWSKI,

Petitioner,

 v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 10-1442 PJH (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This is a habeas case filed pro se by a state prisoner. Petitioner contends that the

restitution obligation imposed upon him at the time of his 1991 sentencing violated his

constitutional rights. 

An application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by a state prisoner can be

entertained by a federal court only “on the ground that [the petitioner] is in custody in

violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). 

The Ninth Circuit, whose decisions are binding on this court, has recently held that a

petitioner who challenges only imposition of a restitution obligation is not challenging his

custody, so the there is no subject matter jurisdiction over a habeas petition making only a

restitution claim. Bailey v. Hill, 2010 WL 1133435 at *4-7 (9th Cir. Mar. 25, 2010). 

Because petitioner challenges only his restitution obligation, the case is DISMISSED

for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Petitioner may disregard the clerk’s notice regarding

his in forma pauperis status. The clerk shall close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 26, 2010. 

 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

P:\PRO-SE\PJH\HC.10\KOZLOWSKI1442.DSM.wpd

Case 4:10-cv-01442-PJH Document 3 Filed 04/26/10 Page 1 of 1