Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01576/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01576-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
CDC, Avenal State Prison
Respondent
Moody Woodrow Tanksley
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MOODY WOODROW TANKSLEY,

Petitioner,

v.

CDC, AVENAL STATE PRISON,

Respondent.

 /

1: 07 CV 01576 LJO WMW HC

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF

HABEAS CORPUS WITHOUT PREJUDICE

[Doc. 1]

Petitioner is a prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. Section 2254. This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a

person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody

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

habeas corpus petition is the correct method for a prisoner to challenge “the very fact or duration of

his confinement,” and where “the relief he seeks is a determination that he is entitled to immediate

release or a speedier release from that imprisonment.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489

(1973). In contrast, a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is the proper method for a

Case 1:07-cv-01576-LJO-WMW Document 4 Filed 12/12/07 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

27

28

prisoner to challenge the conditions of that confinement. In this case, Petitioner explains that he is

challenging the prison authorities’ failure to provide him with needed medical care. Petitioner is

thus challenging the conditions of his confinement. Accordingly, the proper vehicle for Petitioner to

pursue his claims is through a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1) The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice to Petitioner’s right

to file an appropriate civil rights action; and 

2) The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 12, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01576-LJO-WMW Document 4 Filed 12/12/07 Page 2 of 2