Williams v. California Department of Corrections

Good Law
103 F. App'x 641
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 28, 2004No. 03-15213; D.C. No. CV-02-02019-EJG(GGH)California295 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Former California state prisoner Ronald Williams appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that state officials violated his constitutional rights by incarcerating him for parole violations. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we vacate and remand for further proceedings.

The district court dismissed Williams’s action on grounds that it was barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), and the principles of abstention articulated in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971). Because the record shows that Williams is no longer in prison, habeas relief may no longer be available to him. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 18 , 118 S.Ct. 978 , 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998). We therefore remand the action for consideration in light of our decision in Nonnette v. Small, 316 F.3d 872, 877 , 878 n. 7 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that plaintiff could proceed with § 1983 action because habeas relief was no longer available). Moreover,…

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.