Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01460/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01460-0/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

1

 This is plaintiff’s spelling of his name.

2

 The court has corrected plaintiff’s misspelling of Judge Shubb’s name in the case

caption. Plaintiff has also misidentified Judge Shubb as a magistrate judge.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID RAPHEAL1 KING,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1460 FCD GGH P

vs.

WILLIAM B. SHUBB,2 et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is an inmate in county jail awaiting sentencing in federal court before the

Honorable William B. Shubb. Plaintiff has not filed an adequate in forma pauperis affidavit;

alternatively, he has failed to pay the filing fee. However, because this action is one that simply

cannot proceed as a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (or as a Bivens action) or as a

motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2255, the court will recommend summary dismissal of this case

without requiring any further application with regard to the filing fee. 

Plaintiff purports to have filed a civil rights action against defendants District

Judge William B. Shubb, Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Rodriguez and Public Defender

Case 2:05-cv-01460-FCD-GGH Document 7 Filed 08/02/05 Page 1 of 3
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 3

 Or a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

2

James R. Griner. Plaintiff alleges that he was prosecuted as a result of perjured testimony before

the grand jury in violation of his due process rights. The relief plaintiff seeks is release from

custody.

Federal law opens two main avenues to relief on complaints related

to imprisonment: a petition for habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. 2254,3

and a complaint under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, Rev. Stat. 

1979, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1983. Challenges to the validity of

any confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are the

province of habeas corpus, Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475,

500, 93 S.Ct. 1827, 36 L.Ed.2d 439 (1973); requests for relief

turning on circumstances of confinement may be presented in a 

1983 action. 

Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S.749, 750, 124 S.Ct. 1303, 1304 (2004) (per curiam)

An action wherein a plaintiff seeks release from custody with respect to a federal

court criminal matter could only be characterized as a § 2255 motion; however, plaintiff (as

movant) has not met the threshold requirement to challenge the constitutionality of a sentence

imposed by a federal court, i.e., a sentence must have been imposed. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

Plaintiff has clearly set forth that his sentence has not yet been imposed. The court will

recommend dismissal.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed.

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

\\\\\

Case 2:05-cv-01460-FCD-GGH Document 7 Filed 08/02/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

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

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff 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: 8/2/05 

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

king1460.dis

Case 2:05-cv-01460-FCD-GGH Document 7 Filed 08/02/05 Page 3 of 3