Benyamini v. Harris et al
Filing
16
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/25/2010 DENYING pltf's 14 motion for release on bail. (Yin, K)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. J.D. HARRIS, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff's motion for release on bail. Plaintiff's motion is unclear and difficult to decipher. However, to the extent that plaintiff is seeking his release from state prison, he is advised that he is proceeding with a civil rights action before this court. A civil rights action is the proper mechanism for a prisoner seeking to challenge the conditions of his confinement. Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991). In contrast, habeas corpus proceedings are the proper mechanism for a prisoner seeking to challenge the fact or duration of his confinement. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973). Insofar as plaintiff is seeking his release from confinement, a writ of habeas corpus is his sole remedy in federal court. Accordingly, the court will deny plaintiff's motion. //// 1 ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ROBERT P. BENYAMINI, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-2462 DAD P
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
D A D :s j b e n y2 4 6 2 .B
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for release on bail (Doc. No. 14) is denied. DATED: March 25, 2010.
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
