Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-00146/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-00146-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Darryl A. Baca
Petitioner
Robert A. Horel
Respondent

Document Text:

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

NOT FOR CITATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARRYL A. BACA,

Petitioner,

 vs.

ROBERT A. HOREL, et al.,

Respondents. /

No. C 07-0146 PJH (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

constitutional rights were violated when his wife's visiting privileges were suspended for two

years. 

The suspension of petitioner's wife's visits does not affect the fact or duration of

petitioner's incarceration. This means this his claim is not the proper subject of a habeas

action, but must be brought as a civil rights case under Section 1983. See Badea v. Cox,

931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (habeas corpus action proper mechanism for challenging

“legality or duration” of confinement; civil rights action proper method for challenging

conditions of confinement); Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891-92 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1979)

(affirming dismissal of habeas petition on basis that challenges to terms and conditions of

confinement must be brought in civil rights complaint).

In an appropriate case a habeas petition may be construed as a Section 1983

complaint, Wilwording v. Swenson, 404 U.S. 249, 251 (1971), but there have been

significant changes in the law since Wilwording was decided. For instance, the filing fee for

a habeas petition is five dollars, and if leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") is

granted, the fee is forgiven. For civil rights cases, however, the fee is now $350 and under

the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act the prisoner is required to pay it, even if granted in forma

Case 4:07-cv-00146-PJH Document 3 Filed 02/23/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

pauperis status, by way of deductions from income to the prisoner’s trust account. See 28

U.S.C. 1915(b)(2). A prisoner who might be willing to file a habeas petition for which he or

she would not have to pay a filing fee might feel otherwise about a civil rights complaint for

which the $350 fee would be deducted from income to his or her prisoner account. Also, a

civil rights complaint which is dismissed as malicious, frivolous, or for failure to state a claim

would count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), possibly limiting future IFP litigation,

whereas dismissals of habeas cases cannot be counted as strikes. See Andrews v. King,

398 F.3d 1113, 1122 (9th Cir. 2005). 

In view of these potential pitfalls for petitioner if the court were to construe the

petition as a civil rights complaint, the case will be dismissed without prejudice to petitioner

filing a civil rights action if he wishes to do so in light of the above.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2007.

 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\PJH\HC.07\BACA146.DSM

Case 4:07-cv-00146-PJH Document 3 Filed 02/23/07 Page 2 of 2