Manzo

Manzo v. Koenig

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 29, 20213:21-cv-03538California369 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 MANUEL MANZO, Case No. 21-cv-03538-WHO (PR)

Petitioner,

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.

KOENIG, Respondent.

12 This federal action was filed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus, that is, as a challenge to the lawfulness or duration of petitioner Manuel Manzo’s incarceration. A review of the petition, however, shows that Manzo challenges the conditions of his confinement (such as inadequate mental health and medical care). Because success on such claims will not affect the length of his incarceration, his claims are not the proper subject of a habeas action. See Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (habeas corpus action proper mechanism for challenging “legality or duration” of confinement). In light of this, the Court issued an order to Manzo on September 10, 2021, requiring him to file a response by November 1, 2021 that indicated whether he wished “(i) the Court to convert this § 2254 habeas action into one filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; or…

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.