Dehaven

Dehaven v. Schwarzenegger

Good Law
123 F. App'x 287
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 2005No. 03-16832; D.C. No. CV-01-00154-LKKCalifornia403 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

LeRoy De Haven, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against former California Governor, Gray Davis after he was denied parole for the third time in May 1997. De Haven brought several claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , challenging the Governor’s alleged “no parole policy” for inmates convicted of murder. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815, 816 (9th Cir. 1994), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted judgment on the pleadings as to De Haven’s bill of attainder claim because De Haven’s claim did not challenge a legislative act that “determines guilt and inflicts punishment upon an identifiable individual without provision of the protections of a judicial trial.” Seariver Maritime Financial Holdings Inc. v. Mineta, 309 F.3d 662, 668 (9th Cir.2002) (citation omitted).

The district court also properly granted judgment on the pleadings as to De Haven’s obstruction of justice claim because obstruction of justice is a criminal charge that does not provide a private cause of action. See Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1482 (9th…

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.