Opinion
Case No. 14-cv-04697-VC
12-08-2014
MICHAEL ANGELO RUIZ, Petitioner, v. J. BEARD, et al., Respondents.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Petitioner Michael Angelo Ruiz, an inmate at Pelican Bay State Prison, filed this pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging as a violation of his constitutional rights his revalidation as an active gang associate and his continued placement in the Secured Housing Unit. Ruiz has paid the $5.00 filing fee. For the reasons discussed below, the petition is dismissed.
"'Federal law opens two main avenues to relief on complaints related to imprisonment: a petition for habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and a complaint under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, Rev. Stat. § 1979, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Challenges to the lawfulness of confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are the province of habeas corpus.'" Hill v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 573, 579 (2006) (quoting Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750 (2004)). "An inmate's challenge to the circumstances of his confinement, however, may be brought under § 1983." Id.
Although the Supreme Court has declined to decide whether conditions of confinement claims can provide grounds for federal habeas corpus relief, see Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 526 n.6 (1979), the Ninth Circuit, whose decisions are binding on this Court, has concluded that they cannot. See Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 859 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that "habeas jurisdiction is absent, and a § 1983 action proper, where a successful challenge to a prison condition will not necessarily shorten the prisoner's sentence"); Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (holding habeas corpus action is proper mechanism for challenging "legality or duration" of confinement, while civil rights action is proper method for challenging conditions of confinement); Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891-92 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1979) (affirming dismissal of habeas petition on basis that challenges to terms and conditions of confinement must be brought in civil rights complaint).
Ruiz presents only a conditions of confinement claim. Specifically, he claims that he was wrongly reclassified as a gang associate and, thus, improperly housed in the Secured Housing Unit at Pelican Bay. He alleges no facts that lead this Court to conclude that a change in his classification status "necessarily" would affect the duration of his sentence. See Ramirez, 334 F.3d at 859. In fact, the case on which Ruiz relies to support his claim, Wilkenson v. Austin, 545 U.S. 209 (2005), addresses a civil rights complaint, not a habeas petition. Because Petitioner's claim does not implicate the fact or duration of his confinement, the petition fails to state a cognizable basis for federal habeas corpus relief.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court orders as follows:
1. The petition is dismissed. Furthermore, a certificate of appealability is denied. Ruiz has failed to show "that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
2. The Clerk of the Court shall terminate any pending motions.
3. The Clerk of the Court shall enter a separate judgment and close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 8, 2014
/s/________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.
That on 12/8/2014, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. Michael Angelo Ruiz ID: K-05937
Pelican Bay State Prison D9#101 (SHU)
P.O. Box 7500 Crescent City, CA 95532
Richard W. Wieking
Clerk, United States District Court
By:/s/________
Kristen Melen, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable VINCE CHHABRIA