From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Koivisto v. Warden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 15, 2019
Case No. 2:19-08990 CAS (ADS) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2019)

Opinion

Case No. 2:19-08990 CAS (ADS)

11-15-2019

TAUNO AUGUST KOIVISTO, III, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, et al., Respondent.


ORDER DISMISSING HABEAS CORPUS PETITION AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Before the Court for screening is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Petitioner Tauno August Koivisto, III, an inmate at California State Prison, Los Angeles County. [Dkt. No. 1]. To the extent that the Court can understand the Petition, Petitioner alleges a violation of his rights to religious freedom while in prison. [Id.]. It appears, therefore, that Petitioner is not challenging his incarceration or his sentence, but is instead complaining about the conditions of his confinement. A habeas corpus petition is not the proper vehicle for challenging the conditions of confinement. The purpose of habeas corpus is to attack the legality of a conviction or sentence. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 487-88 (1973); cf. Douglas v. Jacquez, 626 F.3d 501, 504 (9th Cir. 2010) ("A habeas court has the power to release a prisoner, but has no other power.") (citation omitted).

Prisoners wishing to challenge the conditions of their confinement must file a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See, e.g., Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 859 (9th Cir. 2003) ("[H]abeas jurisdiction is absent, and a § 1983 action proper, where a successful challenge to a prison condition will not necessarily shorten the prisoner's sentence."). For this reason, the Petition is dismissed.

The Court further finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right or that the court erred in its procedural ruling and, therefore, a certificate of appealability will not issue in this action. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 15, 2019

/s/_________

HONORABLE CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

United States District Judge Presented by: /s/ Autumn D. Spaeth
HONORABLE AUTUMN D. SPAETH
United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Koivisto v. Warden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 15, 2019
Case No. 2:19-08990 CAS (ADS) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2019)
Case details for

Koivisto v. Warden

Case Details

Full title:TAUNO AUGUST KOIVISTO, III, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, et al., Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 15, 2019

Citations

Case No. 2:19-08990 CAS (ADS) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2019)