Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00053/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00053-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ken Katz
Defendant
Ralph Piearcy
Defendant
Jonathan Renshaw
Defendant
Calvin W. Wynn
Plaintiff

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

CALVIN W. WYNN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

JONATHAN RENSHAW, et al., ) 

)

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:10-cv-00053-LJO-GSA-PC 

 

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

(Doc. 1.)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO CLOSE

CASE

Plaintiff, Calvin W. Wynn (“plaintiff”), is a state prisoner proceeding with this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint on January 11, 2010. (Doc. 1.)

I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court

must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous

or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief

from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). “Notwithstanding any

filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time

if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 

1

Case 1:10-cv-00053-LJO-GSA Document 6 Filed 01/15/10 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

27

28

A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the

claim or claims that would entitle him to relief. See Hishon v. King& Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984),

citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); see also Palmer v. Roosevelt Lake Log Owners

Ass'n, 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court must

accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hospital Trustees,

425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), construe the pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve

all doubts in the plaintiff's favor. Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969).

II. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT

Plaintiff is a state prisoner presently incarcerated at the Central Valley Modified Community

Correctional Facility("CVMCCF")in McFarland, California. Plaintiff filed the complaint initiating this

action on January 11, 2010 and names three defendants, Jonathan Renshaw, Ken Katz, and Ralph

Piearcy, all state parole officers. Plaintiff requests as relief money damages for placing him in illegal

custody in retaliation for filing a Form 602 Complaint against a parole officer. 

III. HABEAS CORPUS

When a prisoner challenges the legality or duration of his custody, or raises a constitutional

challenge which could entitle him to an earlier release, his sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus. 

Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 125 S.Ct. 1242, 1245-48 (2005); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475

(1973); Young v. Kenny, 907 F.2d 874 (9th Cir. 1990), cert. denied 11 S.Ct. 1090 (1991). “[A] state

prisoner’s § 1983 action is barred (absent prior invalidation) - no matter the relief sought (damages or

equitable relief), no matter the target of the prisoner’s suit (state conduct leading to conviction or internal

prison proceedings) - if success in that action would necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of

confinement or its duration.” Wilkinson, 544 U.S. at 81-2, 125 S.Ct. at 1248 (2005). Moreover, when

seeking relief for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, “a § 1983 plaintiff must

prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order,

declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such determination, or called into question by a

federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254.” Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S.

2

Case 1:10-cv-00053-LJO-GSA Document 6 Filed 01/15/10 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

27

28

477, 487-88 (1994). “A claim . . . bearing that relationship to a conviction or sentence that has not been

so invalidated is not cognizable under § 1983.” Id. at 488.

In the complaint, plaintiff clearlychallenges his conviction and sentence. Plaintiff claims he was

illegally sentenced in retaliation for filing a Form 602 Complaint against a parole officer. He seeks as

relief monetary damages and a finding that defendants are liable for placing him in illegal custody for

240 days. Success in this action would necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of his confinement or its

duration. Therefore, plaintiff’s sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus, and the court shall

dismiss the claim without prejudice. 

IV. CONCLUSION

The court finds that plaintiff’s complaint does not contain a claim upon which relief may be

granted under section 1983. The court also finds that the deficiencies in the complaint are not capable

of being cured by amendment, and therefore leave to amend shall not be granted. 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (9th Cir. 1987). Therefore, based on the

foregoing analysis, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is dismissed, without prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted under section 1983; and

2. The Clerk is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 15, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3

Case 1:10-cv-00053-LJO-GSA Document 6 Filed 01/15/10 Page 3 of 3