Jeremiah Leon Simmons, Plaintiff-appellant, v. the Executive Lodge, Defendant-appellee, 953 F.2d 1388 (9th Cir. 1992)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 953 F.2d 1388 (9th Cir. 1992) Submitted Jan. 28, 1992. *Decided Feb. 3, 1992

Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and SNEED and ALARCON, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Jeremiah Leon Simmons, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's sua sponte dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action before service of process. We construe the district court's sua sponte dismissal before service of process as a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), and we review de novo. Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1989). We affirm.

Frivolous in forma pauperis complaints may be dismissed before service of process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). A complaint is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis in law or in fact." Id. at 325. In civil rights actions where the plaintiff appears pro se, the court must construe pleadings liberally and afford the plaintiff the benefit of any doubt. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987). A pro se plaintiff with an arguable claim is entitled to issuance and service of process. Jackson, 885 F.2d at 640.

Here, Simmons challenges the actions of his former landlord, who allegedly evicted him without providing a three-day notice required by California state law. Because private individuals who do not act under color of state law are not subject to suit under section 1983, see Franklin v. Oregon, 662 F.2d 1337, 1345 (9th Cir. 1981), the district court properly dismissed the action as frivolous, see Jackson, 885 F.2d at 640.1 

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 1

To the extent that Simmons seeks to challenge the sentence he received for trespassing, his sole remedy is a writ of habeas corpus. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 499 n. 14 (1973)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.