Bolin v. Becerra
- Charles Breyer
- 3:19-cv-07700
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Bolin v. Becerra, Judge Breyer dismissed Bolin’s damages case without prejudice because it challenged his conviction or sentence, but granted his poverty-based fee application.
Paul C. Bolin’s damages action or demand for default was dismissed without prejudice; his application to proceed without paying the filing fee was granted. The ruling concerned claims against Xavier Becerra and other defendants connected with Bolin’s conviction and sentence.
What happened
In Bolin v. Becerra, Paul C. Bolin, a state prisoner, filed a pleading seeking damages from Xavier Becerra and others connected with his 1991 conviction and death sentence. He argued that their failure to declare the judgment void created a default.
The court said damages claims based on actions that would invalidate a conviction or sentence cannot proceed unless that conviction or sentence has first been overturned or otherwise declared invalid. It also said that a direct challenge to the conviction or sentence must be brought through a federal petition challenging the state custody, rather than a damages case.
Judge Charles R. Breyer dismissed the civil action or demand for default without prejudice, closed the case, and terminated pending motions as moot. The court granted Bolin’s application to proceed without paying the filing fee based on his affidavit of poverty.
The detailed version
- Bolin v. Becerra · No. 3:19-cv-07700
- Charles Breyer
- Jan. 10, 2020
Background
Paul C. Bolin, a state prisoner incarcerated on death row at San Quentin State Prison, filed a pleading titled “Demand for Statutory Default Judgment.” The clerk treated the pleading as a new civil action. Bolin stated that he sought a default rather than filing a civil case, but the court found that the pleading sought damages from Xavier Becerra and other people connected with Bolin’s 1991 conviction and death sentence in Kern County Superior Court.
Bolin’s theory was that the defendants’ failure to declare his judgment void, as he believed the law required, constituted a default.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied the rule from Heck v. Humphrey. Under that rule, a person cannot use a damages action to challenge actions or omissions that would make a criminal conviction or sentence invalid unless the conviction or sentence has first been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by an authorized state tribunal, or called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus—a court order addressing unlawful custody.
The court also stated that, to the extent Bolin sought to challenge the validity of his conviction or sentence directly, his sole remedy was a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal procedure for challenging state-court custody.
Ruling
Judge Charles R. Breyer ordered that Bolin’s civil action or demand for default be dismissed without prejudice. The court instructed the clerk to close the file and terminated all pending motions as moot. Separately, the court granted Bolin’s application for permission to proceed without paying the filing fee, based on his affidavit of poverty.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.