Bailey v. Borla

Background

Jasper Bailey, a state prisoner at the Correctional Training Facility in Soledad, California, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging restitution and other fines totaling more than $10,000. The Santa Clara County Superior Court imposed the fines in 2009 in connection with an indeterminate life sentence for multiple sex crimes. Bailey argued that the trial court imposed excessive fines because he was indigent. He represented himself. The court granted his request to proceed without paying the filing fee.

Court’s Analysis

Federal law allows a court to consider a state prisoner’s petition only when the person is “in custody” and the challenged violation is connected to the custody. The court explained that the second custody requirement requires a connection between the claim and the unlawful restraint on the person’s freedom. Success on the claim must result in a change to that restraint.

The court held that Bailey’s challenge to the fines did not satisfy this requirement. Changing or eliminating the monetary judgment would not affect his freedom because he would still serve the rest of his prison sentence in the same way. The court therefore concluded that Bailey was not entitled to federal relief on his excessive-fines claim.

Disposition

The court dismissed the petition for lack of “in custody” jurisdiction. It also denied a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists could not be said to find the court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.