Case Name: Kenneth R. CALIHAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-12
Citations: 158 F. App'x 807
Docket Number: No. 04-17221; D.C. No. CV-04-04336-CRB
Parties: Kenneth R. CALIHAN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before GOODWIN, W. FLETCHER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 158
Pages: 807–807

Head Matter:
Kenneth R. CALIHAN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 04-17221.
D.C. No. CV-04-04336-CRB.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 5, 2005.
Decided Dec. 12, 2005.
Kenneth R. Calihan, Napa, CA, pro se.
Before GOODWIN, W. FLETCHER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Kenneth R. Calihan, a pre-trial detainee in California, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and review the dismissal de novo. See Zitto v. Crabtree, 185 F.3d 930, 931 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.
Calihan contends that the state charges against him must be dismissed due to a violation of his right to a speedy trial. We decline to entertain this contention. Principles of comity and federalism require us to abstain from deciding pre-conviction habeas challenges unless the petitioner demonstrates that "special circumstances" warrant federal intervention. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 41, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971); Carden v. Montana, 626 F.2d 82, 83-84 (9th Cir.1980). Calihan has failed to show any special circumstances. See Carden, 626 F.2d at 84. He has not shown proven harassment, prosecution undertaken by state officials in bad faith without hope of obtaining a valid conviction, or extraordinary circumstances and irreparable injury. See id. Accordingly, the district court properly denied Calihan's § 2241 petition.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.