Opinion
21-cv-04439-WHO (PR)
07-21-2021
ANTOINE DESHAWN BARNES, Petitioner, v. ROSEMARY OROZCO, et al., Respondents.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
WILLIM H. ORRICK, United States District Judge.
This federal action was filed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus, that is, as a challenge to the lawfulness or duration of petitioner Antoine Deshawn Barnes's incarceration. A review of the petition, however, shows that Barnes asks to have a television journalist arrested, investigated, and her property seized and searched. Because success on such a request will not affect the length of his incarceration, his claims are not the proper subject of a habeas action. See Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (habeas corpus action proper mechanism for challenging “legality or duration” of confinement). In an appropriate case a habeas petition may be construed as a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Wilwording v. Swenson, 404 U.S. 249, 251 (1971). However, this is not such a case. The persons named as respondents are not state actors, and therefore are not liable under § 1983. Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635, 640 (1980).
Accordingly, this federal habeas action is DISMISSED. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of respondents and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.