(PC) Mariscal v. Superior Court of California County of Riverside ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 OMAR MARISCAL, No. 1:20-cv-00089-NONE-EPG (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING 13 v. ACTION AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT 14 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA JUDGE AND CLOSE THIS CASE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, et al., 15 (Doc. Nos. 13 & 15) Defendants. 16 17 Omar Mariscal (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 21, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge entered findings and recommendations, 21 recommending that plaintiff’s claim challenging his conviction and sentence be dismissed as 22 barred by the decision in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486–87 (1994) and that his other 23 claims be dismissed either because those claims are newly asserted in plaintiff’s amended 24 complaint or were unrelated to the claim challenging his conviction. (Doc. No. 15.) 25 Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and 26 recommendations. Plaintiff filed objections on August 10, 2020. (Doc. No. 16.) 27 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 28 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, WAS UV OD MAE ENS MUO oe PIR OFeEY PT Aye ev’ 1 || the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 2 analysis. Plaintiffs’ objections do not call into question the reasoning presented in the findings 3 || and recommendations. 4 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 5 1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 21, 2020, (Doc. No. 15), are 6 adopted; 7 2. Plaintiffs claim challenging his conviction and sentence is dismissed without 8 prejudice;! 9 3. All other claims are also dismissed without prejudice; and 10 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case for the 11 purpose of closing the case and then to close this case. 12 B IT IS SO ORDERED. ~ ‘ai 14 Dated: _ August 18, 2020 eee Te > 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 | a 27 ' The dismissal of the Heck—barred claim is without prejudice to its refiling in the event plaintiff’s conviction or sentence at issue were to be reversed, expunged, or otherwise 28 || invalidated.