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)

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