Miles v. Cox et al

Filing 9

ORDER Denying 7 8 Motions to Expedite Case signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 04/07/2015. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

MAURICE MILES, SR.,
Plaintiff,

11
12

Case No. 1:14-cv-01683-SKO (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO
EXPEDITE CASE

v.
(Docs. 7 and 8)

13

R. COX, et al.,

14

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

15
16

Plaintiff Maurice Miles, Sr., a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

17 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 28, 2014. On January 15, 2015,
18 Plaintiff filed a motion seeking a speedy trial, and on February 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion
19 requesting the Court to “react” to his case. (Docs. 7, 8.)
20

The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, invoked by Plaintiff in his first

21 motion, applies to criminal prosecutions. See e.g., U.S. v. Corona-Verbera, 509 F.3d 1105, 1114
22 (9th Cir. 2007). This is a civil case and Plaintiff’s reliance on the Sixth Amendment’s Speedy
23 Trial Clause is misplaced. Id. With respect to the pendency of this action in general, the Eastern
24 District of California is one of the busiest courts in the nation and there are a significant number of
25 prisoner civil rights cases pending.

As Plaintiff was notified in section III(C) of the First

26 Informational Order, his complaint will be screened as expeditiously as possible, but delay
27 resulting from the volume of cases is inevitable. (Doc. 3.)
28

1

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motions, construed as seeking expedited rulings and/or a jury trial,

2 are HEREBY ORDERED DENIED.
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 7, 2015

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2