IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 13, 2012
JERRY W. ARMSTRONG,
REDDING PAROLE DEPARTMENT, ET. AL., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. Senior United States District Judge
Plaintiff, proceeding in pro per, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to the court by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to certify whether the appeal is taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
Having reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the appeal is not taken in good faith. For the reasons stated in the court's April 12, 2012, findings and recommendations, plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's attempts to challenge his parole conditions and/or his parole violations is properly the subject of a writ of habeas corpus, not a § 1983 action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. This appeal is frivolous and not taken in good faith;
2. Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is appropriately revoked; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Pro Se Unit at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.