Turner v. San Francisco Superior Court
- Charles Breyer
- 3:24-cv-08272
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
Judge Breyer dismissed Turner v. San Francisco Superior Court without prejudice because the detention challenge belonged in another district and other claims required a separate action.
Anthony R. Turner, whose amended filing was dismissed without prejudice; the court left open separate filings in the Eastern District of California and separate civil-rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
What happened
In Turner v. San Francisco Superior Court, Anthony R. Turner, a pretrial detainee facing state criminal charges, challenged his detention and alleged wrongdoing by state and local officials.
The court explained that a petition challenging his detention at Solano County Jail belonged in the Eastern District of California. It also said his separate claims about arrests, detention, and transfers had to be brought in a separate civil-rights lawsuit.
Judge Breyer dismissed the amended filing without prejudice, allowing Turner to file the detention petition in the Eastern District of California and separate civil-rights lawsuit or lawsuits. The court closed the case and terminated pending motions as moot.
The detailed version
- Turner v. San Francisco Superior Court · No. 3:24-cv-08272
- Charles Breyer
- Mar. 25, 2025
Background
Anthony R. Turner, a pretrial detainee at the Solano County Jail facing state criminal charges in Solano County Superior Court, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 while he was at the Contra Costa County Jail. He claimed that City and County of San Francisco officials unlawfully arrested and detained him and transferred him to the Contra Costa County Jail based on a falsified warrant from San Francisco County Superior Court. Turner filed the matter without a lawyer.
On January 31, 2025, the court dismissed the § 2254 petition with partial leave to amend. The court said Turner could challenge his current pretrial detention through a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 if he identified the detention and charges at issue and, if possible, showed that he had used available state judicial remedies and that special circumstances supported federal intervention. The court also said that separate wrongdoing claims against state or local officials had to be brought in a separate civil-rights action, rather than in a detention challenge.
Current Filing
On March 3, 2025, Turner filed an “Amended Complaint Petition.” It sought both to challenge his current detention at the Solano County Jail on pending charges in Solano County Superior Court and to pursue separate wrongdoing claims concerning his arrests, detentions, and transfers to the Contra Costa and Solano county jails.
Ruling
The court held that a § 2241 petition challenging detention at the Solano County Jail had to be filed in the Eastern District of California, where Solano County lies. It further held that the separate claims against state or local officials had to be brought in one or more separate civil-rights actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The court dismissed Turner’s “Amended Complaint Petition” without prejudice to filing a § 2241 petition in the Eastern District of California and/or a separate § 1983 civil-rights action or actions. It directed the clerk to close this detention case and terminate pending motions as moot.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.