Simmons v. Hedgpeth

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 15 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CHRISTOPHER ISAAC SIMMONS, No. 08-15143 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 07-cv-01058-LJO v. ANTHONY HEDGPETH, MEMORANDUM * Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 5, 2010 ** Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Christopher Isaac Simmons appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we reverse and remand. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Simmons contends the district court erred by dismissing his habeas petition rather than construing it as a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. When a pro se habeas corpus petition may be fairly read to state a claim under the Civil Rights Act, it should be so construed. See Galligher v. McCarthy, 470 F.2d 740, 741 (9th Cir. 1972). Accordingly, Simmons’ habeas petition is to be treated as a § 1983 complaint. See id. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See id. We express no opinion on the merits of Simmons’ § 1983 action. REVERSED; REMANDED. 2 08-15143