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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 11 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DONALD MORRIS LEE, No. 16-35472
Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00311-RSL
v.
MEMORANDUM*
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 8, 2017**
Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
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
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
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 (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.
2 16-35472