Joey v. Robertson
- Beth Freeman
- 5:21-cv-09370
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Joey v. Robertson, Judge Freeman dismissed Dennis Joey’s habeas petition without prejudice because his visitation claim concerned prison conditions, and denied his stay motion as moot.
Dennis Joey’s habeas petition was dismissed without prejudice, leaving him able to file a separate civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 concerning the alleged denial of family visitation.
What happened
In Dennis Joey v. Jim Robertson, Joey, a state prisoner, filed a petition asking for release-related relief under the federal habeas statute. He alleged that Pelican Bay State Prison denied him family visits with his wife and children without due process, but he did not challenge his conviction or sentence.
The court held that the claim concerned prison conditions, not the validity or length of his confinement. Because success would not require his release or shorten his sentence, the court said he must bring the claim in a civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court declined to convert the habeas petition into that type of case because the habeas form lacked information normally required for a civil-rights complaint and because the filing-fee requirements differ.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman dismissed the habeas action without prejudice to Joey filing a civil-rights case under § 1983, and directed the Clerk to send him civil-rights complaint forms and an application to proceed without paying the fee. The judge denied Joey’s motion to stay the matter as moot.
The detailed version
- Joey v. Robertson · No. 5:21-cv-09370
- Beth Freeman
- Apr. 14, 2022
Background
Dennis Joey, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He alleged that Pelican Bay State Prison denied him family visitation with his wife and children without due process. The petition did not challenge the constitutionality of his state conviction or sentence. The opinion also states that Joey had not resolved the filing-fee issue.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that a habeas petition is the proper vehicle when a prisoner seeks release or a shorter period of confinement. A civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is the proper vehicle for claims that challenge conditions of confinement and whose success would not require release or a shorter sentence. The court determined that Joey’s visitation claim challenged a condition of confinement and that success on the claim would not affect the duration of his custody.
The court acknowledged that it could treat the habeas petition as a § 1983 civil-rights complaint, but declined to do so. It reasoned that the habeas form did not provide information needed for a civil-rights complaint, such as all intended defendants and the connection between each defendant and the claims. The court also noted the different filing-fee requirements and uncertainty about whether Joey intended to pay the civil-rights filing fee.
Disposition
The court dismissed the habeas action without prejudice to Joey filing a civil-rights action under § 1983, preferably using the court’s civil-rights complaint form. The Clerk was instructed to provide two copies of that form and an application to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court denied Joey’s motion to “stay” the matter as moot and terminated the docket entry for that motion. Judge Beth Labson Freeman signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.