Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 22, 2021

Barnes v. Orozco

Judge
William Orrick
Docket
3:21-cv-03658
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Barnes v. Orozco: Judge Orrick dismissed Barnes’s habeas action because his requested relief would not affect his incarceration.

Who this affects

Antoine Deshawn Barnes and the respondents, including the persons named in the petition; the petition also sought criminal charges against television journalists at KTVU.

What happened

In Barnes v. Orozco, Antoine Deshawn Barnes filed a federal petition challenging his incarceration, but asked the court to have television journalists at KTVU arrested and criminally charged.

The court said that request would not affect the length of Barnes’s incarceration, so it was not a proper subject for a habeas case. The court also declined to treat the petition as a civil-rights complaint because the named respondents were not state actors.

Judge William H. Orrick dismissed the federal habeas action, directed the Clerk to terminate pending motions, enter judgment for the respondents, and close the file. The court granted Barnes’s request to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Barnes v. Orozco · No. 3:21-cv-03658
Judge
William Orrick
Date
June 22, 2021

Background

Antoine Deshawn Barnes filed this federal action as a petition for habeas corpus, a procedure used to challenge the lawfulness or duration of a person’s incarceration. The petition asked the court to have television journalists at KTVU arrested and brought up on criminal charges.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that success on Barnes’s request would not affect the length of his incarceration. It therefore concluded that the request was not a proper subject for a habeas action. The court also noted that, in an appropriate case, a habeas petition may be treated as a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It concluded that this was not such a case because the persons named as respondents were not state actors. The available opinion text ends after that statement.

Ruling

Judge William H. Orrick ordered that the federal habeas action be dismissed. The Clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions, enter judgment in favor of the respondents, and close the file. The court granted Barnes’s motion to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.