Opinion
Case No. 4:06cv192-RH/WCS.
July 5, 2006
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This matter is before the court on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (document 6), and the objections thereto (document 8). I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the objections.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner. He was subjected to discipline including the loss of gain time. In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, he asserts the disciplinary action was unconstitutional. The report and recommendation concludes this action must be dismissed under the doctrine of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487, 114 S. Ct. 2364, 129 L. Ed. 2d 383 (1994), and Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 648-49, 117 S. Ct. 1584, 137 L. Ed. 2d 906 (1997). Under that doctrine, the sole federal avenue for attacking disciplinary action imposed upon a state prisoner that has the effect of lengthening his or her term of imprisonment is a petition for writ of habeas corpus; such an attack cannot be maintained under § 1983. Plaintiff's reliance in his objections on cases involving disciplinary segregation — but not a change in the length of incarceration — is misplaced.
For these reasons and those set forth in the report and recommendation,
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the opinion of the court. The complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, shall enter on the docket that the case was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and shall close the file.
SO ORDERED.