Page v. Navarrete

Background

Richard Lawrence Page, an inmate at Folsom State Prison, filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The opinion states that Page appears to have sought resentencing in state court and that the state court denied a counsel-related request during those proceedings. He then appears to have challenged that ruling before the California Commission on Judicial Performance, which found his judicial complaint insufficient. Page asked the California Supreme Court to review that decision, but alleged that its clerk, Jorge E. Navarrete, refused to file the request.

Page sought $10,000 and unspecified declaratory or injunctive relief. The court also addressed the possibility that Page was asking for federal assistance in obtaining release from prison.

Screening and analysis

Because Page was a prisoner seeking relief from a governmental officer, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court concluded that the complaint did not state a claim that could proceed.

First, the court held that Navarrete was absolutely immune from suit for the alleged refusal to file Page’s request. The court treated that refusal as a quasi-judicial function comparable to a judge’s decision about whether a litigant complied with court rules and procedures. The immunity applied to the alleged action because it involved enforcement of the California Supreme Court’s local rules and procedures.

Second, the court held that any request for an order requiring the California Supreme Court to accept and decide Page’s request for review was barred by the rule from O’Shea v. Littleton. The court explained that granting such relief would require federal monitoring of Page’s individual state-court case and would improperly interfere with the administration of the state judicial system.

Third, the court held that a request for release from prison had to be brought through a federal petition challenging the legality or duration of imprisonment. The court explained that a civil-rights complaint cannot be converted into such a petition and that a request for release brought in this action had to be dismissed without prejudice to filing a separate petition after state proceedings concluded.

Disposition

The court found that the complaint’s defects could not be cured by amendment. It dismissed the action without leave to amend. In the conclusion, the court stated that dismissal was with prejudice as to Page’s request for damages and any request for an injunction directed at the California Supreme Court. It stated that dismissal was without prejudice to Page seeking release through a separate petition challenging his imprisonment. The court also noted that Page could seek damages for unlawful incarceration if his conviction were later invalidated.

The court granted Page’s application to proceed without prepaying the filing fee and assessed an initial partial filing fee of $8.86. It directed the clerk to close the file.