(HC) Manley v. Campbell

Opinion

NABIL IBN MANLEY, Case No. 2:23-cv-00039-JDP (HC) Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA v. PAUPERIS TAMMY CAMPBELL, ECF No. 5 Respondent. SCREENING ORDER FINDING THAT THE PETITION DOES NOT STATE A COGNIZABLE SECTION 2254 CLAIM AND GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND WITHIN ECF No. 1 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After reviewing the petition, I find that it fails to state a viable claim. I will give petitioner a chance to amend before recommending that this action be dismissed. Additionally, I will grant his application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 5. The petition is before me for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Under Rule 4, the judge assigned to the habeas proceeding must examine the habeas petition and order a response to the petition unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. See Valdez v. Montgomery, 918 F.3d 687, 693 (9th Cir. 2019); Boyd v. Thompson, 147 F.3d 1124, 1127 (9th Cir. 1998). Petitioner argues that the parole board used an “unfair and systemically biased risk assessment instrument” in its decision to deny him parole. ECF No. 1 at 4. A parole denial may be challenged via section 2254, but a petitioner is entitled only to minimal safeguards. Federal law requires only that the state “provides an inmate seeking parole with an opportunity to be heard and ...a statement of the reasons why parole was denied.” Styre v. Adams, 645 F.3d 1106, 1108 (9th Cir. 2011); see also Swarthout v. Cooke, 562 U.S. 216, 220 (2011). Petitioner does not allege that he was denied either an opportunity to be heard or a statement of reasons for denial of parole. Petitioner may, if he chooses, file an amended petition that explains why his claims should be allowed to proceed. If he does not, I will recommend that this action be dismissed. It is ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner may file an amended § 2254 petition within thirty days of this order’s entry. If he does not, I will recommend that the current petition be dismissed for the reasons stated in this order. 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner a federal § 2254 habeas form with this order. 3. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED. ( q oy — Dated: _ February 22, 2023 q——— JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE