Smiley v. Salinas Valley State Prison Mailroom and Records Dept

Filing 15

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 6/22/17. (Certificate of Service Attached) (kcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/22/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DERRAN SMILEY,
Plaintiff,

8
9

Case No. 17-cv-01208-PJH
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE
TO AMEND

v.
SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON
MAILROOM AND RECORDS DEPT,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Defendant.

12
13
14

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

15
16

STANDARD OF REVIEW

17

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners

18

seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

19

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and

20

dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief

21

may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such

22

relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v.

23

Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

24

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement

25

of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not

26

necessary; the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim

27

is and the grounds upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007)

28

(citations omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed

1

factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds’ of his 'entitle[ment]

2

to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the

3

elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to

4

raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550

5

U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state

6

a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 570. The United States Supreme

7

Court has recently explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly: “While legal

8

conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual

9

allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their
veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.”

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).

12

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential

13

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was

14

violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the

15

color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

16

LEGAL CLAIMS

17

Plaintiff alleges that prison officials improperly read his legal mail.

18

Prison officials may institute procedures for inspecting “legal mail,” e.g., mail sent

19

between attorneys and prisoners, see Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 576-77 (1974)

20

(incoming mail from attorneys), and mail sent from prisoners to the courts, see Royse v.

21

Superior Court, 779 F.2d 573, 574-75 (9th Cir. 1986) (outgoing mail to court). But

22

“prisoners have a protected First Amendment interest in having properly marked legal

23

mail opened only in their presence.” Hayes v. Idaho Correctional Center, 849 F.3d 1204,

24

1211 (9th Cir. 2017). See also O'Keefe v. Van Boening, 82 F.3d 322, 325 (9th Cir. 1996)

25

(the opening and inspecting of "legal mail" outside the presence of the prisoner may have

26

an impermissible "chilling" effect on the constitutional right to petition the government).

27

However, prison officials may open and inspect mail to a prisoner from courts

28

outside the prisoner’s presence because mail from courts, as opposed to mail from a
2

1

prisoner’s lawyer, is not “legal mail.” Hayes, 849 F.3d 1204 at 1211; Keenan v. Hall, 83

2

F.3d 1083, 1094 (9th Cir. 1996), amended, 135 F.3d 1318 (9th Cir. 1998). With minute

3

exceptions, correspondence from a court to a litigant is a public document. See Martin v.

4

Brewer, 830 F.2d 76, 78 (7th Cir. 1987).

5

Plaintiff states that prison officials opened a letter sent from the California

6

Supreme Court, outside of plaintiff’s presence. As noted above, mail sent from the court

7

to a prisoner is not legal mail. In addition, the letter sent by the California Supreme Court

8

was sent on August 19, 2016, and contained the address of the prison and the case

9

number, “S236826”. However, the California Supreme Court neglected to put plaintiff’s
name or his prison identification number on the envelope. Complaint at 15. Prison

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

officials told plaintiff that the envelope was opened in order to ascertain who it should be

12

directed to. Complaint at 12.

13

Nor has plaintiff identified what was in the envelope. The California Supreme

14

Court docket does not identify what was sent to plaintiff on August 19, 2016. On August

15

18, 2016, the California Supreme Court received a motion from plaintiff regarding his

16

pending habeas petition, so it is possible that the mail was related to that motion or just

17

an acknowledgment that the court received the motion.

18

Plaintiff has not presented a cognizable claim because mail sent from the courts is

19

not legal mail. To the extent prison officials violated a prison regulation, that does not

20

present a constitutional claim. The complaint is dismissed with leave to amend to provide

21

more information. Plaintiff may also wish to describe or provide a copy of what he

22

received from the California Supreme Court.

23

CONCLUSION

24

1. The complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend in accordance with the

25

standards set forth above. The amended complaint must be filed no later than July 24,

26

2017, and must include the caption and civil case number used in this order and the

27

words AMENDED COMPLAINT on the first page. Because an amended complaint

28

completely replaces the original complaint, plaintiff must include in it all the claims he
3

1

wishes to present. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). He may

2

not incorporate material from the original complaint by reference. Failure to file an

3

amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case.

4

2. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the

5

court informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed

6

“Notice of Change of Address,” and must comply with the court's orders in a timely

7

fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute

8

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 22, 2017

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

13
14

\\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\PJHALL\_psp\2017\2017_01208_Smiley_v_Salinas_Valley_State_Prison_Mailroom_and_Recor
ds_D_(PSP)\17-cv-01208-PJH-dwlta.docx

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

DERRAN SMILEY,

Case No. 17-cv-01208-PJH

Plaintiff,
6
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

7
8

SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON
MAILROOM AND RECORDS DEPT,

9

Defendant.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.

12
13
14
15
16

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.

17
18
19

Derran Smiley ID: F28162
Salinas Valley State Prison
P.O. Box 1050
Soledad, CA 93960-1050

20
21
22

Dated: June 22, 2017

23
24

Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court

25
26
27
28

By:________________________
Kelly Collins, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
5