United States District Court, N.D. California
June 1, 2004.
OBA FRELIMO, Plaintiff
JOE MCGRATH, et al., Defendants
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MAXINE CHESNEY, District Judge
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff Oba Frelimo, a California prisoner, has filed this pro
se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff
alleges that he was disciplined by prison officials for violating prison
rules in a manner that violates his constitutional rights. He states in
his complaint that part of his punishment for the violation was the loss
of 360 days of good time credits.
A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in
which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its
review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any
claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2).
Pro se pleadings must, however, be liberally construed.
See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th
Here, plaintiff challenges the validity of a decision by prison
officials that he was guilty of violating a prison rule, which decision
resulted in his loss of good time credits. Any claim by a prisoner
attacking the validity or duration of his confinement must be brought
under the habeas sections of Title 28 of the United States Code. See
Calderon v. Ashmus, 523 U.S. 740, 747 (1998). A prisoner must bring
a habeas petition if the nature of his claim is such that it may result
in entitlement to an earlier release, as in a claim for the violation of rights in connection with the loss of good time
credits. See Young v. Kenny, 907 F.2d 874, 876-78 (9th Cir.
1990). A civil rights complaint seeking habeas relief is subject to
dismissal without prejudice to the prisoner's bringing his claim in a
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See Trimble v. City of Santa
Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 586 (9th Cir. 1995).
Accordingly, plaintiff's complaint challenging the discipline he
received for violating prison rules is DISMISSED, without prejudice to
refiling in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus after he has exhausted
his claims in the state courts. In light of the dismissal, the
application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and no fee is due.
This order terminates docket no. 2.
The Clerk shall close the file and terminate any pending motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED. [EDITORS NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE] JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
 Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a
trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its
[XX] Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing
before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED plaintiff's complaint
challenging the discipline he received for violating prison rules is
DISMISSED, without prejudice to refiling in a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus after he has exhausted his claims in the state courts.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.