Donald Lee v. State of Washington

690 F. App'x 974
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMay 11, 2017
Docket16-35472
StatusUnpublished

This text of 690 F. App'x 974 (Donald Lee v. State of Washington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Donald Lee v. State of Washington, 690 F. App'x 974 (9th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Washington state prisoner Donald Morris Lee appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his “RICO Complaint by a Civilian.” We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), see Howard v. Am. Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, 746 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

Although Lee’s action was docketed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, Lee is not seeking habeas relief, as the district court noted. Instead, he alleges a RICO violation premised upon someone allegedly forging a judge’s signature on orders in his state court proceedings. The district court properly dismissed Lee’s action because he failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible RICO claim. See Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., Inc., 473 U.S. 479, 496, 105 S.Ct. 3275, 87 L.Ed.2d 346 (1985) (elements of RICO claim); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.
473 U.S. 479 (Supreme Court, 1985)
Hebbe v. Pliler
627 F.3d 338 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Howard v. America Online Inc.
208 F.3d 741 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
690 F. App'x 974, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-lee-v-state-of-washington-ca9-2017.