Frank Hale Bennett v. People of the State of California

Bennett filed this action on March 6, 1967 under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . The only defendants named are People of the State of California, California Adult Authority and California Department of Corrections. The trial court dismissed the action on the ground that “the issues presented are not cognizable by this Court.” We affirm.

Bennett has proceeded in pro. per., both in the trial court and here. Much of his complaint deals with matters of California law that do not raise any question of violation of federally protected rights, constitutional or statutory. These we disregard.

The only allegations that arguably raise a federal question under the Civil Rights Act are these:

Bennett is a prisoner of the State, of California, convicted of soliciting another to commit a felony in violation of Cal. Pen.C. § 653f. He was sentenced on April 9, 1965 to an indeterminate term, 6 months to 5 years. (Cal.Pen.C. § 1168). When the complaint was filed, he had served approximately 27 months. His claim of denial of due process and equal protection rests solely upon the following:

He then lists in the statement of facts referred to above the numbers of ten prisoners, each of…

I concur in the result reached by the majority, but only on the grounds that the appellant’s complaint neither named proper parties as defendants (Clark v. Washington, 366 F.2d 678, 680 (9 Cir., 1966); Sires v. Cole, 320 F.2d 877, 879 (9 Cir., 1963)) nor stated a proper claim under the Civil Rights Act (Silver v. Dickson, 403 F.2d 641 (9 Cir., 1968)). Since these grounds are dis-positive, I see no reason to consider whether petitioner’s allegations, if proven, would or would not establish denial of due process or equal protection.

406 F.2d 36 Frank Hale BENNETT, Appellant, v. PEOPLE OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., Appellee. No. 21952. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Jan. 9, 1969, Certiorari Denied April 7, 1969, See 89 S.Ct. 1320 . Frank Hale Bennett, pro. per. Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen. of Cal., Edsel W. Haws, Charles P. Just, Deputy Attys. Gen., Sacramento, Cal., for appellee. Before MADDEN, Judge of the United States Court of Claims, DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge, and WEIGEL, District Judge. * DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: 1 Bennett filed this action on March 6, 1967 under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1983. The only defendants named are People of the State of California, California Adult Authority and California Department of Corrections. The trial court dismissed the action on the ground that 'the issues presented are not cognizable by this Court.' We affirm. 2 Bennett has proceeded in pro. per., both in the trial court and here. Much of his complaint deals with matters of California law that do not raise any question of violation of federally protected rights, constitutional or statutory. These we disregard. 3 The only allegations that arguably raise a federal question under the Civil Rights…