Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GRAY v. CASTEAL

United States District Court, N.D. California


March 17, 2004.

COREY COLEMAN GRAY, Plaintiff
v.
INMATE SCOTT CASTEAL; et al., Defendant

The opinion of the court was delivered by: SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge

JUDGMENT

This action is dismissed without prejudice to plaintiff making the same allegations in a complaint for which he pays the full filing fee at the time of filing the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED. Page 1

  ORDER OF DISMISSAL

  Corey Coleman Gray, a prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also seeks to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

  The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PLRA"), which was enacted on April 26, 1996, provides that a prisoner may not bring a civil action in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 "if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Sectin on 1915(g) requires that this court consider prisoner actions dismissed prior to, as well as after, the PLRA's enactment. Tierney v. Kupers, 128 F.3d 1310, 1311-12 (9th Cir. 1997).

  Gray has had three or more prior prisoner actions dismissed by this court on the grounds that they were frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The dismissed cases include Gray v. Luther, C 94-4386 MHP, Gray v. Romero, C 94-4469 MHP, Gray v. Lockhart, C 94-4470 MHP, Gray v. Ukiah Police Department, C 95-1002 MHP, Page 2 Gray v. Tuso, C 95-2503 SI, and Gray v. People, C97-3250 SI. sense of Gray's rambling complaint, it appears that prison officials are keeping him in administrative segregation to prevent harm, rather than exposing him to a danger. Because Gray has had at least three prior dismissals and is not under imminent danger of serious physical injury, his request to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED and this action is DISMISSED. This dismissal is without prejudice to Gray making the same allegations in a complaint for which he pays the full $150.00 filing fee at the time of filing the complaint. The Clerk shall close the file.

  IT IS SO ORDERED.

20040317

© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.