Keselica v. Carcieri , 238 F. App'x 656 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit
    No. 07-1195
    MICHAEL G. KESELICA,
    Plaintiff, Appellant,
    v.
    DONALD L. CARCIERI, ET AL.,
    Defendants, Appellees.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
    [Hon. William E. Smith, U.S. District Judge]
    Before
    Boudin, Chief Judge,
    Torruella and Lipez, Circuit Judges.
    Michael G. Keselica on brief pro se.
    September 7, 2007
    Per Curiam.    Michael G. Keselica appeals the district
    court's sua sponte dismissal of his civil rights complaint pursuant
    to 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e)(2)(B)(ii).      Having carefully reviewed the
    record and appellant's submissions on appeal, we conclude that the
    district   court   correctly   determined   that   Keselica's   claims
    challenged the legality of his confinement and therefore were not
    cognizable under 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    .      See Wilkinson v. Dotson, 
    544 U.S. 74
    , 81-82 (2005); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 
    411 U.S. 475
    , 489-90
    (1973) (challenge to fact or duration of confinement must be
    through habeas corpus).   Dismissal of the complaint was proper for
    the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge's December 4, 2006,
    Report and Recommendation, subsequently adopted by the district
    court.
    To the extent Keselica challenges the district court's
    denial of leave to amend the complaint, no error is apparent
    because the proposed amendments, which would have added claims
    against Virginia officials and a demand for monetary damages, would
    not have cured the deficiencies in the complaint.       See Universal
    Comm. Sys., Inc. v. Lycos, Inc., 
    478 F.3d 413
    , 418 (1st Cir. 2007);
    Aponte-Torres v. University of Puerto Rico, 
    445 F.3d 50
    , 58 (1st
    Cir. 2006). Further, contrary to Keselica's contention, appellees'
    failure to file a brief on appeal does not amount to a waiver of
    objections to Keselica's arguments.     See Fed. R. App. P. 31(c).
    -2-
    The judgment of the district court is affirmed.   See 1st
    Cir. Loc. R. 27.0(c).   Keselica's "Application for Order Revoking
    or Suspending Governor Donald Carcieri's Rendition Warrant" is
    denied.
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-1195

Citation Numbers: 238 F. App'x 656

Judges: Boudin, Torruella, Lipez

Filed Date: 9/4/2007

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024