Cantu v. Velazqaz
Filing
11
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND re 1 Complaint filed by Jesse Cantu. Signed by Judge James Donato on 6/22/17. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/22/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
JESSE CANTU,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
13
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
LEAVE TO AMEND
v.
M. A. VELAZQAZ,
Re: Dkt. No. 3
Defendant.
11
12
Case No. 17-cv-02636-JD
Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
He has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
DISCUSSION
14
15
STANDARD OF REVIEW
16
Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek
17
redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.
18
§ 1915A(a). In its review, the Court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims
19
which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek
20
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se
21
pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th
22
Cir. 1990).
23
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the
24
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Although a complaint “does not need detailed
25
factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff’s obligation to provide the ‘grounds’ of his ‘entitle[ment] to
26
relief’ requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a
27
cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above
28
the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations
1
omitted). A complaint must proffer “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
2
face.” Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has explained the “plausible on its face”
3
standard of Twombly: “While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they
4
must be supported by factual allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court
5
should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement
6
to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).
7
To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) a right secured by
8
the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the alleged deprivation was
9
committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).
LEGAL CLAIMS
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
Plaintiff alleges that his legal documents were confiscated and then discarded. Prisoners
12
have a constitutional right of access to the courts. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 350 (1996);
13
Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 821 (1977). To establish a claim for any violation of the right of
14
access to the courts, the prisoner must prove that there was an inadequacy in the prison’s legal
15
access program that caused him an actual injury. See Lewis, 518 U.S. at 350-55. To prove an
16
actual injury, the prisoner must show that the inadequacy in the prison’s program hindered his
17
efforts to pursue a non-frivolous claim concerning his conviction or conditions of confinement.
18
See id. at 354-55. Destruction or confiscation of legal work may violate an inmate’s right to
19
access to the courts, see Vigliotto v. Terry, 873 F.2d 1201, 1202 (9th Cir. 1989), if plaintiff can
20
establish actual injury, see Sands v. Lewis, 886 F.2d 1166, 1171 (9th Cir. 1989).
21
During a search of plaintiff’s cell, correctional officers confiscated a pillow case that was
22
full of papers and had a rope tied to the top. Correctional officers believed it was a manufactured
23
weight bag for exercising which was not permitted. Plaintiff states that the bag contained his legal
24
documents. The pillow case and legal documents were not returned and appear to have been
25
discarded. Plaintiff states that he was hindered in his ability to litigate a state habeas petition.
26
Plaintiff has not presented sufficient allegations to support a cognizable claim. The
27
complaint is dismissed with leave to amend to provide more information. To proceed with a claim
28
for denial of access to the courts or for destruction of legal work, plaintiff must establish an actual
2
1
injury. In an amended complaint, plaintiff should describe in more detail what occurred in his
2
state habeas petition and any injury that resulted from the lack of his legal materials.
3
Plaintiff has also requested the appointment of counsel. The Ninth Circuit has held that a
4
district court may ask counsel to represent an indigent litigant only in “exceptional
5
circumstances,” the determination of which requires an evaluation of both (1) the likelihood of
6
success on the merits, and (2) the ability of the plaintiff to articulate his claims pro se in light of
7
the complexity of the legal issues involved. Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.
8
1991). Plaintiff appears able to present his claims adequately, and the issues are not complex,
9
therefore the request is denied.
CONCLUSION
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
1.
Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel (Docket No. 3) is DENIED.
12
2.
The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend. The amended complaint must
13
be filed within twenty-eight (28) days of the date this order is filed and must include the caption
14
and civil case number used in this order and the words AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first
15
page. Because an amended complaint completely replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must
16
include in it all the claims he wishes to present. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th
17
Cir. 1992). He may not incorporate material from the original complaint by reference. Failure to
18
amend within the designated time will result in the dismissal of this case.
19
3.
It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the
20
Court informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed “Notice
21
of Change of Address,” and must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to
22
do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of
23
Civil Procedure 41(b).
24
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 22, 2017
26
27
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge
28
3
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
JESSE CANTU,
Case No. 17-cv-02636-JD
Plaintiff,
5
v.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
6
7
M. A. VELAZQAZ,
Defendant.
8
9
10
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
That on June 22, 2017, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing
said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
16
17
18
Jesse Cantu ID: T73021
Pelican Bay State Prison
P.O. Box 7500
Crescent City, CA 95532
19
20
21
Dated: June 22, 2017
22
23
Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court
24
25
26
27
By:________________________
LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable JAMES DONATO
28
4
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?