The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No. 1) AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS SCREENING ORDER
On March 8, 2011, Plaintiff Victor Gallegos Delgadillo, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff's Complaint is now before the Court for screening.
II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT
The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous, malicious," or that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). "Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
Section 1983 "provides a cause of action for the 'deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United States." Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Section 1983 is not itself a source of substantive rights, but merely provides a method for vindicating federal rights conferred elsewhere. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 393-94 (1989).
III. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT
The Complaint names Michell Griggs, District Attorney and the City of Fresno as Defendants in this action. Plaintiff alleges the following:
On June 16, 2000, Plaintiff was sentenced to a "program" and one year in prison for sexual battery and corporal injury to a spouse. Plaintiff was represented by counsel, and the case was prosecuted by Defendant Griggs. (Coml. at 3.) These convictions alone were not a sufficient basis to deport Plaintiff out of the United States. (Id. at 4.)
At some point Defendant Griggs created a false record of an additional criminal conviction that had actually been previously dismissed. (Id. at 3.) "Based on the falsified sinature [sic] by District Attorney Michell Griggs on the Order For Placement And Delivery (PC 1203.03), [P]laintiff was convicted now for a deportable crime." (Id. at 4.) The falsified documents stated that Plaintiff had plead guilty to three charges. On July 16, 2003, an immigration judge accepted the false documents as true and accordingly deported Plaintiff. (Id.) Plaintiff asserts violations of his Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
To state a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements:
(1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated and
(2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988); Ketchum v. Alameda ...