Gary W. Hirsch v. District Court of Josephine County

977 F.2d 589 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Gary W. HIRSCH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DISTRICT COURT OF JOSEPHINE COUNTY, Respondent-Appellee. No. 91-36185. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 13, 1992. * Decided Oct. 21, 1992. Before BEEZER, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Gary W. Hirsch appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition for failure to state a claim. We review de novo, Watts v. Bonneville, 879 F.2d 685, 687 (9th Cir.1989), and affirm. 3 In his petition, Hirsch alleged that the District Court of Josephine County, Oregon, had unlawfully restrained his liberty when it ordered him to report to the county jail to be fingerprinted and photographed in connection with several traffic citations Hirsch had received. The district court dismissed the petition, finding that Hirsch had failed to allege he was in custody for purposes of 28 U.S.C.…