Michael Benjamin Tenore v. Renee Siemsen, et al.

Summary

The Eastern District of California denies Michael Benjamin Tenore’s objection to the screening dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint challenging the denial of parole. The court holds that his claims concern the allegedly erroneous merits-based evaluation of parole evidence, rather than a challenge to parole procedures cognizable under Wilkinson v. Dotson, and grants him thirty days to file an amended complaint.

Holdings

1. A prisoner may not use section 1983 to challenge the substance or correctness of a state parole denial where the claim seeks to invalidate the denial and resulting continued incarceration; such a claim is not the type of parole-procedure challenge permitted by Wilkinson v. Dotson.
2. Plaintiff's objection and request to proceed were denied because they did not establish that the prior screening analysis was erroneous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff's challenge to the merits of a state parole denial, including officials' alleged reliance on a fraudulent psychological report and failure to consider his age and health, is cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a prior favorable habeas judgment.
2. Whether plaintiff's objection demonstrated that the court's prior screening dismissal should be reversed.

Disposition

other