Robert Erler v. Connie Bisbee

MEMORANDUM

Nevada state prisoner Robert Erler appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process and equal protection violations in connection with his parole hearings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1138 (9th Cir.2005) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(ii)); Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 853 (9th Cir.2003) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We reverse and remand.

The district court dismissed Erler’s action under Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74 , 125 S.Ct. 1242 , 161 L.Ed.2d 253 (2005), because it concluded that Erler’s claims sound in habeas and challenge the validity of his confinement. However, because Er-ler sought a new parole hearing and not immediate or speedier release, success in this action would not necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of Erler’s continued confinement or its duration. See id. at 81-82 , 125 S.Ct. 1242 (allowing procedural challenges to parole hearings because the injunctive and declaratory relief that plaintiffs sought under § 1983 “would not necessarily spell immediate or speedier release”); see also…