Valdez

Background

Ismael Valdez, identified in the caption as FN2300108, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 seeking federal review of a 2018 Monterey County Superior Court conviction for “assault n battery” on police officers in Greenfield, California. The opinion states that Valdez was sentenced to 240 days and released sometime in 2018. When he filed this petition, he was a pretrial detainee at Monterey County Jail facing charges of criminal threats and vandalism. He proceeded without a lawyer and requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee.

Filing-fee request

Based solely on Valdez’s affidavit of poverty, the court granted his application to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Habeas jurisdiction

Federal habeas jurisdiction generally requires the petitioner to be “in custody” under the conviction or sentence being challenged when the petition is filed. The court held that Valdez filed this petition on August 29, 2023, long after he had completed the 240-day sentence and ceased to be subject to court supervision for the 2018 conviction. The court therefore concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to consider the petition.

Disposition

The court dismissed the § 2254 petition for lack of “in custody” federal habeas jurisdiction. It denied a certificate of appealability because the required showing that reasonable judges could debate the procedural ruling was not met. The clerk was instructed to close the file and terminate all pending motions as moot.

The opinion also states that, to the extent Valdez sought damages for alleged wrongdoing connected with the 2018 prosecution and conviction, such a claim would need to be brought in a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The order did not otherwise state a separate disposition of a damages claim.