Opinion
No. 13-15467
09-16-2014
KAY LEWIS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WHITE MOUNTAIN APACHE TRIBE, Respondent - Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 3:12-cv-08073-SRB MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 12, 2014 San Francisco, California Before: BEA, IKUTA, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
--------
Kay Lewis appeals the district court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 25 U.S.C. § 1303, the Indian Civil Rights Act. We affirm.
The district court could not grant Lewis habeas relief unless he was in "detention," § 1303, or its functional equivalent, "custody," Jeffredo v. Macarro, 599 F.3d 913, 918 (9th Cir. 2010). Custody involves "severe restraints on [a person's] individual liberty," Hensley v. San Jose Dist. Mun. Ct., 411 U.S. 345, 351 (1973), including restraints that fall "outside conventional notions of physical custody," Edmunds v. Won Bae Chang, 509 F.2d 39, 40 (9th Cir. 1975).
The district court correctly held that the White Mountain Apache Tribe's refusal to permit Lewis to run for election to the Tribal Council was not a sufficiently severe restraint on his liberty to constitute custody. The restriction of Lewis' candidacy does not create a deprivation of liberty similar to the types of infringement on personal movement previously recognized as establishing federal habeas corpus jurisdiction. See Hensley, 411 U.S. at 351 (release on own recognizance with restrictions on movement); Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 237, 241-42 (1963) (parole restrictions); Poodry v. Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, 85 F.3d 874, 879, 893-95 (2d Cir. 1996) (banishment).
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Tribe's "Motion to Strike Part of Appellant's Reply Brief for Matters Not in the Record" is DENIED.