(HC)Brandstatt v. Clark ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM H.L. BRÄNDSTATT, Case No. 1:22-cv-01193-JLT-CDB 12 Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING THE 13 v. PETITION WITH PREJUDICE AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 14 KENNETH CLARK, WARDEN, CLOSE THE CASE 15 Respondent. (Doc. 9) 16 17 On March 16, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 18 to dismiss Petitioner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for lack of jurisdiction. The Court served the 19 findings and recommendations on Petitioner and gave him 14 days to file objections thereto. On 20 April 7, 2023, the Clerk of Court received and filed Petitioner’s objections. (Doc. 10). Because 21 Petitioner attested in his proof of service that he deposited those objections for mailing on March 22 30, 2023, the Court deems them timely. 23 In his objections, Petitioner reargues the merits of the Rules Violation Report and 24 challenges the allegations in a police report, both of which were considered and cited by 25 Petitioner’s parole board as reasons to deny parole in his case. He otherwise fails to address the 26 magistrate judge’s finding that, because success on Petitioner’s claims “would not necessarily 27 lead to his immediate or earlier release from confinement,” his claim does not fall within “the core of habeas corpus,” and he must instead bring his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Nettles 1 | vy. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 935 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc). 2 With respect to Petitioner’s plea in his objections that if he cannot get justice, “there is 3 | something dreadfully wrong with the country’s judiciary system” (Doc. 10 at p. 8), the magistrate 4 | judge’s findings and recommendations were transmitted to Petitioner accompanied by a copy of a 5 || prisoner civil rights complaint form, which may be an alternative avenue Petitioner can pursue to 6 | seek redress. 7 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this g | case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes the findings and g || recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 10 Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS: 11 1. The findings and recommendations issued on March 16, 2022, (Doc. 9) are 2 ADOPTED IN FULL. 13 2. Petitioner William Brindstatt’s petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is 14 DISMISSED with prejudice. 15 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. ig | Dated: _ April 14, 2023 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28