Abraham T. Yang v. James Rowland, Ed Veit, L.E. Debord, Estelle Wayne

891 F.2d 297 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Abraham T. YANG, Petitioner, v. James ROWLAND, Ed Veit, L.E. Debord, Estelle Wayne, et al, Respondents. No. 89-55089. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 7, 1989. * Decided Dec. 4, 1989. Before ALARCON, O'SCANNLAIN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Yang brought an action against prison officials seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , for allegedly misconstruing California statutes so as to lengthen his term of imprisonment prior to obtaining parole. A magistrate dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Yang did not amend the complaint, but pursued his action before the district court. The district court dismissed Yang's action for lack of jurisdiction. 3 We recently held that whenever a state prisoner's claim to relief "requires as its predicate a determination that a sentence currently served is invalid or unconstitutionally long[,]" habeas corpus relief must be…