Alan R. Dohner, Petitioner-appellant, v. W.h. Seifert, Respondent-appellee, 5 F.3d 535 (9th Cir. 1993)

MEMORANDUM^*** 

Pro se petitioner Alan R. Dohner appeals the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition. Dohner filed a habeas petition alleging that in-cell plumbing problems at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles ("MDC") violated his Eighth Amendment rights. The district court dismissed the petition without prejudice, holding that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to attack conditions of confinement.

" [T]he writ of habeas corpus is limited to attacks upon the legality or duration of confinement." Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891 (9th Cir. 1979) (citing Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484-86 (1973)). Furthermore, Mead v. Parker, 464 F.2d 1108 (9th Cir. 1972), cited by Dohner, is inapposite because it involved denial of access to the courts. In sum, Dohner may not use a habeas petition to attack conditions of confinement.

The government argues that this case is moot because Dohner is no longer confined at MDC. However, because Dohner has a "reasonable expectation" of returning to MDC, his claim is not moot, Johnson v. Moore, 948 F.2d 517, 519 (9th Cir. 1991), and he may have a claim for damages or injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

AFFIRMED.