From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Foster v. Beard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 29, 2016
No. CV 16-965 DDP FFM (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)

Opinion

No. CV 16-965 DDP FFM

03-29-2016

RICKY TYRONE FOSTER., Petitioner, v. JEFFREY A. BEARD, Respondent.


ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING PETITION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

On February 11, 2016, Petitioner Ricky Tyrone Foster ("Petitioner"), a state prisoner incarcerated at High Desert State Prison in Susanville, California, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Dkt. No. 1).

The Petition does not challenge Petitioner's underlying conviction or the duration of Petitioner's confinement. Rather, the Petition alleges that Petitioner's constitutional rights were violated by the Small Claims Division of the Los Angeles County Superior Court and by California State Prison Los Angeles County mailroom staff. (Id. at 11-18).

The Writ of Habeas Corpus is limited to attacks upon the legality or duration of confinement. Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891 (9th Cir. 1979) (citing Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484-86 (1973)). Accordingly, claims that neither "necessarily imply the invalidity of a conviction" nor "necessarily spell speedier release" are not cognizable on habeas. Blair v. Martel, 645 F.3d 1151, 1157 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing Skinner v. Switzer, 131 S.Ct. 1289, 1298-1299 & n.13 (2011)).

To the extent that they can be discerned, Petitioner's claims are not cognizable on federal habeas. Because the Petition ostensibly attacks the legality of a decision of the Small Claims Division of the Superior Court and the actions of prison mail room staff, they may be appropriate under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. However, as they neither implicate the validity of Petitioner's conviction nor necessarily spell Petitioner's speedier release, they are not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Based on the above discussion and pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 cases in the United States District Court, it is therefore ordered that this action be dismissed without prejudice. DATED: MARCH 29, 2016

/s/_________

DEAN D. PREGERSON

United States District Judge Presented by:

/S/FREDERICK F. MUMM

FREDERICK F. MUMM

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Foster v. Beard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 29, 2016
No. CV 16-965 DDP FFM (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)
Case details for

Foster v. Beard

Case Details

Full title:RICKY TYRONE FOSTER., Petitioner, v. JEFFREY A. BEARD, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 29, 2016

Citations

No. CV 16-965 DDP FFM (C.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016)