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.

Kevin F. Vos v. Anthony Hesdgpeth

January 10, 2011

KEVIN F. VOS,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ANTHONY HESDGPETH, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Screening Order

I. Screening Requirement

Plaintiff Kevin F. Vos, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 9, 2008. On November 18, 2009, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's complaint, with leave to amend, for failure to state any claims. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on January 20, 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).

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 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Facial plausibility demands more than the mere possibility that a defendant committed misconduct, Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1950, and while factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not, id. at 1949.

II. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint

A. Allegations

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison, where the events at issue in this action occurred. Plaintiff names current Warden Kelly Harrington, former Warden Mike Knowles, former Warden Anthony Hedgpeth, Chief Deputy Warden C. J. Chrones, and Captain H. Tyson as defendants, and seeks damages and a declaration that his rights were violated.*fn1

Plaintiff was charged with resisting staff, a prison rules violation. On November 5, 2006, a prison disciplinary hearing was conducted and Plaintiff was found guilty of the reduced charge of disobeying a direct order. Plaintiff was sentenced to ninety days of in-cell confinement. As a result, Plaintiff was denied outdoor exercise from November 5, 2006, through January 21, 2007.

Plaintiff alleges that his confinement to quarters without exercise violated section 3322 of Title 15, which provides in relevant part that "[n]o inmate shall be kept in disciplinary segregation or confined to quarters more than ten days," and "[a]n inmate shall not be confined to quarters or otherwise deprived of exercise as a disciplinary disposition longer than ten days unless, in the opinion of the institution head, the inmate poses such an extreme management problem or threat to the safety of others that longer confinement is necessary." Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15 § 3322(a),(c) (West 2010). Further, extended confinement requires the director's written approval. Tit. 15, § 3322(c).

In Plaintiff's situation, he was not subject to any of the circumstances that permit extending the confinement, and neither the institution head nor the director approved extended confinement. Plaintiff asserts violations of the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and violations of state law.

B. Section 1983 ...


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.