Wilson v. Cambell et al

Filing 21

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Investigator 11 , signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 7/26/17. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 CHRISTOPHER WILSON, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 13 v. CAMPBELL, et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-00534-SKO (PC) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF INVESTIGATOR (Doc. 11) Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Plaintiff, Christopher Wilson, is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on claims of excessive force in violation of the Eight Amendment against Correctional Officers T. Campbell and Michelle Miller. On March 10, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting appointment of an investigator to assist him. (Doc. 11.) Plaintiff contends that, although he has forms approving his request to 21 correspond with material inmate witnesses at other facilities, his correspondence is returned 22 indicating that no approvals are on file. (Id.) 23 24 25 26 27 “‘[T]he expenditure of public funds [on behalf of an indigent litigant] is proper only when authorized by Congress. . . .’” Tedder v. Odel, 890 F.2d 210, 211-12 (9th Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v. MacCollum, 426 U.S. 317, 321 (1976)). There is no provision for the appointment of an investigator to contact witnesses for Plaintiff. However, the Wardens and Litigation Coordinators at Plaintiff’s facility (Kern Valley State Prison) and at the facilities where 28 1 1 his witnesses are housed (California State Prison in Lancaster, California Rehabilitation Center in 2 Norco, and Mule Creek State Prison in Ione) are requested to look into the matter and facilitate 3 Plaintiff’s correspondence with inmate witnesses.1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for an investigator, filed 4 5 March 10, 2017, (Doc. 11), is DENIED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to forward a copy of this 6 order and Plaintiff’s motion to the Warden offices and to Litigation Coordinators at Kern Valley 7 State Prison, California State Prison in Lancaster, California Rehabilitation Center in Norco, and 8 Mule Creek State Prison in Ione, to facilitate Plaintiff’s correspondence with his inmate 9 witnesses. 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: July 26, 2017 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 How access is best facilitated in light of Plaintiff=s housing status and other custody or classification factors is left to the sound discretion of prison officials. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?