Keilyn Lorenz Ellis v. Shannon Dicus

I.

DISCUSSION

A. Improper Challenge To Conditions Of Confinement.

A petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is available to a person “in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court” only if he is “in custody in violation of the laws of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). The “core of habeas corpus” is to challenge the “fact or duration” of a petitioner’s confinement, not the conditions of confinement. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 498-500 (1973); Nettles v. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 935 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc).

If a prisoner seeks relief regarding the conditions of confinement, such as inadequate medical care, disciplinary conditions, or prison administration, his claims must be brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, not through a habeas petition. See Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 750 (2004) (per curiam) (While “[c]hallenges to the validity of any confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are the province of habeas corpus; requests for relief turning on circumstances of confinement may be presented in a [42 U.S.C.] § 1983 [civil rights] action.”); see, e.g., Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d…