Quair v. Garratt
- James Donato
- 3:19-cv-08420
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Quair v. Garratt, Judge Donato dismissed a prisoner’s civil-rights complaint as duplicative of his case challenging the same conviction.
David S Quair’s civil-rights action was dismissed as duplicative, and the clerk was requested to close the case. The order did not resolve the validity of his conviction or sentence.
What happened
In Quair v. Garratt, David S Quair, a state prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights complaint under federal law. He sought relief concerning his conviction and sentence from April 6, 2018, including a 39-month plea agreement.
The court noted that Quair had recently filed a separate case challenging the same conviction. It dismissed this civil-rights case as duplicative and requested that the clerk close it.
Judge James Donato issued the order on January 23, 2020. The order did not decide whether Quair’s conviction or sentence was valid.
The detailed version
- Quair v. Garratt · No. 3:19-cv-08420
- James Donato
- Jan. 23, 2020
Background
David S Quair, identified as a state prisoner, filed a civil-rights complaint without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court had allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee. The complaint sought relief concerning Quair’s underlying conviction and sentence from April 6, 2018, in connection with a 39-month plea agreement.
Court’s analysis
The court observed that Quair had recently filed a separate case challenging the same conviction. Because that case addressed the same underlying conviction, the court determined that this civil-rights action was duplicative. The order cited Adams v. California Department of Health Services, 487 F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007).
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint as duplicative and requested that the clerk close the case. The order did not decide the validity of Quair’s conviction, sentence, or plea agreement. Judge James Donato signed the order on January 23, 2020.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.