Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Saundro Wilkerson v. K. Harrington

December 8, 2010

SAUNDRO WILKERSON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
K. HARRINGTON, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS (DOC. 1)

Screening Order

I. Background

Plaintiff Saundro Wilkerson ("Plaintiff") 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. Plaintiff filed his complaint on April 26, 2010.

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). "Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id.

II. Summary Of Complaint

Plaintiff is incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison ("KVSP") in Delano, California, where the events giving rise to this action occurred. Plaintiff names as Defendants warden K. Harrington, and appeals coordinators T. Billings and B. Daviega.

Plaintiff alleges the following. On February 9, 2010, an incident occurred between black and white inmates in building 5-B of facility B. Prison officials determined this incident was a riot. All participants were then placed on administrative segregation, but with rights as to non-contact visits, canteen access, and yard privilege. However, black and white inmates in general population were locked down pursuant to a program status report which suspended all privileges indefinitely. Plaintiff was included amongst these inmates. Plaintiff was also discontinued from his anti-psychotic medication which caused him to experience severe symptoms of his bipolar disorder. Plaintiff experienced angry voices, depression, sleep deprivation, hopelessness, and general bipolar symptoms. Plaintiff contends that punitive measures were taken by staff, including loud noises all night and bright lights to deprive Plaintiff of his rest and peace of mind.

Plaintiff attempted to seek relief through the administrative appeal process. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants T. Billings and B. Daviega obstructed and suppressed Plaintiff's First Amendment rights to exhaust administrative remedies. Plaintiff contends that his mail is being processed in an untimely manner, and showers are not being run consistently. Plaintiff contends that a hostile environment is being created to repress black and white inmates in general population via race-based lockdowns. Plaintiff contends that this is invidious discrimination.

Plaintiff contends that the interview process is used to cultivate relationships with confidential informants who are used as agents by the prison to gauge the mood of the inmate population. Plaintiff contends that this is a liberty interest.

Plaintiff requests declaratory relief, injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, and a transfer to a prison which will provide medical support for Plaintiff's physical and psychological disabilities.

III. Analysis

A. Eighth ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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