Rangel v. Tilton et al

Filing 28

ORDER Denying Motion For Leave To Depose Inmate Witness (ECF No. 27 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 6/1/2012. (Fahrney, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

LEONARDO JOSEPH RANGEL,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:10-cv–01790-BAM PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
DEPOSE INMATE WITNESS

v.
(ECF No. 27)

12
13

JAMES TILTON, et al.,
Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Leonardo Joseph Rangel is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

16

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 4, 2012, an order issued opening

17

the discovery in this action. Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to depose an inmate witness pursuant

18

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 31(a)(2)(B) on May 30, 2012. (ECF No. 27.)

19

Plaintiff seeks leave to depose an inmate who is currently incarcerated at Pelican Bay State

20

Prison in order to obtain a declaration. Inmates may only correspond with one another if they obtain

21

written authorization from the appropriate prison officials. Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15 § 3139 (2010).

22

Further, the Court does not have jurisdiction in this action over anyone other than Plaintiff and

23

Defendants, and cannot order that Plaintiff be allowed to correspond with his witnesses. E.g., City

24

of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S. Ct. 1660, 1665 (1983); Valley Forge Christian

25

Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S. Ct. 752,

26

757-58 (1982); Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1126 (9th Cir. 2006).

27

Plaintiff’s has not provided evidence that he completed the process to obtain written

28

authorization from the appropriate prison officials. Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15 § 3139 (2010). Because
1

1

the Court does not have jurisdiction in this action over anyone other than Plaintiff and Defendants,

2

the Court can only make a request to prison officials and cannot order them to allow Plaintiff to

3

correspond with his witnesses. E.g., City of Los Angeles, 461 U.S. at 102; Valley Forge Christian

4

Coll., 454 U.S. at 471; Jones, 444 F.3d at 1126. While the Court can request that prison officials

5

allow Plaintiff to correspond with inmate witnesses, such a request shall not be made by the Court

6

without assurances that Plaintiff has followed procedures and used the available resources at the

7

prison to obtain written authorization after consideration by prison officials of safety, security, and

8

procedural priorities. The Court recognizes that prison administrators "should be accorded wide-

9

ranging deference in the adoption and execution of policies and practices that in their judgment are

10

needed to preserve internal order and discipline and to maintain institutional security." Whitley v.

11

Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 321-322 (1986) (quoting Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 547 (1970).

12

Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to depose inmate witnesses shall be denied.

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
10c20k

June 1, 2012

/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2