From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. Washington

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 11, 2017
No. 16-35472 (9th Cir. May. 11, 2017)

Opinion

No. 16-35472

05-11-2017

DONALD MORRIS LEE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent-Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00311-RSL MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Washington state prisoner Donald Morris Lee appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his "RICO Complaint by a Civilian." We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), see Howard v. Am. Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, 746 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

Although Lee's action was docketed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, Lee is not seeking habeas relief, as the district court noted. Instead, he alleges a RICO violation premised upon someone allegedly forging a judge's signature on orders in his state court proceedings. The district court properly dismissed Lee's action because he failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible RICO claim. See Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., Inc., 473 U.S. 479, 496 (1985) (elements of RICO claim); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Lee v. Washington

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 11, 2017
No. 16-35472 (9th Cir. May. 11, 2017)
Case details for

Lee v. Washington

Case Details

Full title:DONALD MORRIS LEE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 11, 2017

Citations

No. 16-35472 (9th Cir. May. 11, 2017)

Citing Cases

EEON v. U.S. Dep't of Agric.

A pro se complaint is liberally construed, but it still must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible…

Carnacchi v. Lendup

A pro se complaint is liberally construed, but it still must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible…