Abe Lincoln v. The California Adult Authority

Good Law
435 F.2d 133·1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 6206
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 197024470California815 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duniway, J.

Lincoln appeals from a judgment dismissing his Civil Rights action (28 U.S. C. § 1342; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 , 1983) on the ground that the complaint fails to present a substantial federal question. We affirm.

Lincoln is a California prisoner. He seeks damages and injunctive relief against the California Adult Authority’s members, representatives and agents. He also asks to have a three judge court convened to determine the constitutionality of Adult Authority Resolution 171 and Cal.Penal Code, §§ 1168, 8020 and 5077 as applied to him. He alleges , that he was convicted of first degree robbery (Cal.Penal Code, § 211) in 1948 and was sentenced under the California Indeterminate Sentence Law for the term prescribed by law — five years to life. Cal. Penal Code, §§ 213, 617, 1168. In May, 1953, the Authority fixed his term at 8 years, which would mean a release date of May 29, 1956. He was paroled in June, 1954. He was picked up as a parole violator, his parole was suspended, and his term was re-fixed at life on January 23, 1956. The term was re-fixed pursuant to Resolution 171, adopted March 6, 1951. It provides that “effective April 1, 1951, when paroles are can-celled, suspended,…

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.