Opinion
No. C 03-5822 MJJ (PR)
March 15, 2004
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff Craig C. Busch ("plaintiff'), a California prisoner, has filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that he was disciplined by prison officials for violating prison rules in a manner which violates his constitutional rights. His complaint and the attachments thereto reveal that part of his punishment for the rule violation was the loss of ninety days of good time credits.
A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Prose pleadings must, however, be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988).
Plaintiff challenges the validity of prison officials' decision that he was guilty of violating a prison rule, and he seeks a restoration of his lost good time credits. Any claim by a prisoner attacking the validity or duration of his confinement must be brought under the habeas sections of Title 28 of the United States Code. See Calderon v. Ashmus, 523 U.S. 740, 747 (1998). A prisoner must bring a habeas petition if the nature of his claim is such that it may result in entitlement to an earlier release, as in a claim for the violation of his rights in connection with the loss of good time credits. See Young v. Kenny, 907 F.2d 874, 876-78 (9th Cir. 1990). A civil rights complaint seeking habeas relief should be dismissed without prejudice to the prisoner's bringing it as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 586 (9th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, plaintiff's claims challenging the discipline he received for violating prison rules are dismissed without prejudice to his raising them in a habeas petition.
plaintiff also seeks money damages, but such a claim is barred until the decision that he has violated prison rules has been reversed, expunged, set aside or called into question. See Sheldon v. Hundley, 83 F.3d 231, 233 (8th Cir. 1996).
For the reasons expressed, plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus after he has exhausted his claims in the state courts.
The clerk shall close the file and terminate all pending motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
() Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.
(X) Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED
Pursuant to the order filed on March 15, 2004, this case is Dismissed.