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.

Paul Winfield v. Jerry Brown

February 4, 2013

PAUL WINFIELD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JERRY BROWN,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Allison Claire United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

28 U.S.C. § 1915 permits any court of the United States to authorize the commencement and prosecution of any suit without prepayment of fees by a person who submits an affidavit indicating that the person is unable to pay such fees. However,

[i]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section 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).

The plain language of the statute (§ 1915(g)) makes clear that a prisoner is precluded from bringing a civil action or an appeal in forma pauperis if the prisoner has brought three frivolous actions and/or appeals (or any combination thereof totaling three). See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1178 (9th Cir. 1999). 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) should be used to deny a prisoner's in forma pauperis status only upon a determination that each action reviewed (as a potential strike) is carefully evaluated to determine that it was dismissed as frivolous, malicious or for failure to state a claim. Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2005).

In a recent case, Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2011), the Ninth Circuit held that a district court strike was not final until an appeal had been resolved.

A review of the court's records reflects that plaintiff's in forma pauperis status was revoked as three strikes barred in Winfield v. Schwarzenegger, Case No. 2:09-cv-0636 JAM KJN, on January 25, 2011.*fn1 Also, on October 31, 2012, plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied as three strikes barred in Winfield v. Rappoport, et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-2387 WBS AC P.

The undersigned additionally notes that, since 1991, plaintiff has filed at least 31 civil rights cases in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The undersigned finds that the following actions constitute strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g):

Winfield v. Davis, Case No. 2:03-cv-0101 FCD PAN P - June 9, 2003 case dismissed for failure to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Winfield v. Katcher, et al., Case No. 2:03-cv-2064 GEB GGH P - June 24, 2005 case dismissed for plaintiff's repeated failure to state a claim.

Winfield v. Downing, Case No. 2:06-cv-0391 GEB JFM P - March 16, 2007 case dismissed for plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Appeal dismissed for failure to prosecute on July 13, 2007.

Winfield v. Suliven, et al., Case No. 2:07-cv-0828 LKK EFB P - April 16, 2008 case dismissed for ...


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.