TIMOTHY SPERL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; AND JOHN VAN DE KAMP, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that declaratory relief is unavailable to attack a state criminal conviction and that collateral estoppel bars reconsideration of issues already decided in state habeas corpus proceedings.
Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief to invalidate state criminal convictions based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct. The district co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Federal Civil Rights Action cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Sperl sought declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to invalidate his 1974 state criminal convictions because of alleged prosecutorial misconduct. The district court dismissed his claims. Sperl v. Deukmejian, 482 F.Supp. 1026 (C.D.Cal.1980). We affirm.
Sperl’s claim under § 2201 was properly dismissed. Declaratory relief is not available in federal court to attack a state criminal conviction, Ruip v. Kentucky, 400 F. 2d 871, 872 (6th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 911, 89 S.Ct. 1755, 23 L.Ed.2d 224 (1969); Booker v. Arkansas, 380 F. 2d 240, 242 (8th Cir. 1967); Shannon v. Sequeechi, 365 F. 2d 827, 829 (10th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 386 U.S. 481, 87 S.Ct. 1175, 18 L.Ed.2d 225 (1967). Sperl argues that his complaint should therefore be treated as a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Habeas corpus relief is not appropriate because Sperl was not in custody when he filed his complaint. Carafas v. LaVallee, 391 U.S. 234, 238, 88 S.Ct. 1556, 1559, 20 L.Ed.2d 554 (1968); Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 468, 96 S.Ct. 3037, 3040, 49 L.Ed.2d 1067 (1976).
Sperl’s claim under § 1983 was also properly dismissed. Sperl’s claim of prosecutorial misconduct was tried and rejected in state habeas corpus proceedings. The doctrine of collateral estoppel therefore precludes reconsideration of the issue in a federal civil rights action, even when federal habeas corpus relief is not available. Allen v. McCurry, - U.S. -, -, 101 S.Ct. 411, 419, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hawkins v. Risley, 984 F.2d 321 (9th Cir. 1993)
Authorities Cited
- Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (U.S. 1976)
- Allen v. McCURRY, 449 U.S. 90 (U.S. 1980)
- Carafas v. Lavallee, 391 U.S. 234 (U.S. 1968)
- Persico v. United States, 395 U.S. 911 (U.S. 1969)
- Gardner v. United States, 395 U.S. 911 (U.S. 1969)
- Booker v. State OF Ark., 380 F.2d 240 (8th Cir. 1967)
- Berman v. Bd. of Elections, 386 U.S. 481 (U.S. 1967)
- Shannon v. Sheriff Sequeechi, 365 F.2d 827 (10th Cir. 1966)
- Ruip v. Commonwealth OF Ky., 400 F.2d 871 (6th Cir. 1968)