Borla

Jackson v. Borla

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 11, 20255:25-cv-04304California823 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DERRICK EUGENE JACKSON, Case No. 25-cv-04304-NW

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER SCREENING AND

9 v. DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

10 EDWARD J. BORLA, et al.,

Defendants. 11

12 13 Plaintiff Derrick Eugene Jackson, a state prisoner, filed a pro se civil rights complaint 14 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See ECF No. 4. Jackson’s application for leave to proceed in forma 15 pauperis has been granted in a separate order. The Court has screened Jackson’s Complaint; for 16 the reasons set forth below, the Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to filing a 17 habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 Jackson alleges that his sentence is invalid based on changes to his release date. See ECF 20 No. 4 at 3. Jackson was notified of two changes by letter on September 6, 2022, and June 24, 21 2024, with the latter referencing a “calculation correction.” ECF No. 4 at 3. Jackson alleges that 22 he received a 10-year credit and a potential release date of June 20,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.