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.

Cannon v. Landers

United States District Court, D. Oregon

April 25, 2019

DAVID LEE CANNON, Plaintiff,
v.
SHERIFF LANDERS, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER OF DISMISSAL

          MICHAEL W. MOSMAN CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         David Lee Cannon ("plaintiff), a pretrial detainee at the Lincoln County Jail, brings this proceeding pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court previously granted plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. For the reasons set forth below, this Court dismisses plaintiffs Complaint (ECFNo. 1).

         STANDARDS

         This Court must dismiss an action initiated by a prisoner seeking redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee, if the Court determines that the action (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and l9l5A(b).

         In order to state a claim, a plaintiff must allege facts which, when accepted as true, give rise to a plausible inference that the defendants violated the plaintiffs constitutional rights. Ashcroft v. Iqbal 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556-57 (2007). A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal 556 U.S. at 678; Moss v. U.S. Secret Serv., 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). "A pleading that offers labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (internal quotations omitted). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, and therefore this Court construes the pleadings liberally and affords plaintiff the benefit of any doubt. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007).

         DISCUSSION

         Plaintiff complains that defendants violated his right of access to the courts with respect to his "active lawsuit filed 6:19-cv-00026-JR." Pl.'s Compl. at 3. In his first claim for relief, plaintiff alleges that defendants denied him photocopies because he "reached a $15 copy limit," and asserts that his "lawsuit is at risk of being dismissed [due] to Pus] inability to obtain copies." Id., In his second claim for relief, plaintiff alleges that defendants denied him "legal postage and paper for [his] lawsuit" needed to "communicate with courts and . . . lawyers." Id. at 3-4. Plaintiff complains that defendants have forced him to use his "personal postage and paper" for his "active lawsuit," and that he must sell food from his lunch and dinner trays to buy postage and paper. Id. at 4-5.

         "It is indisputable that indigent inmates must be provided at state expense with paper and pen to draft legal documents . . . and with stamps to mail them." Bounds V. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 824-25 (1977); King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 568 (9th Cir. 1987), overruled on other grounds, Lacey v. Maricopa Cty, 693 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012). A prisoner's claim that he has been denied adequate legal resources requires the prisoner to allege facts to support a reasonable inference that he suffered an actual or imminent injury to court .access in an existing or contemplated action. Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-51, 355 (1996); Penton v. Pool, 724 F.' App'x 546, 548-50 (9th Cir. 2018); Ross v. Franke, No. 2:18-cv-00240-YY, 2018 WL 1125587, at *2 (D. Or. Feb. 26, 2018); McKenzie v. Rossi-Hill No. 3:07-cv-01752-AC, 2009 WL 4891955, at *8-9 (D. Or. Dec. 16, 2009), affd, 459 Fed.Appx. 661, 662 (9th Cir. 2011).

         In the instant proceeding, plaintiff does not allege facts giving rise to a reasonable inference that he suffered an actual injury to court access as a result of the limitations placed on indigent paper, photocopies, and postage. Further, this Court takes judicial notice that plaintiff has not missed any deadlines in Lee v. Lincoln Cty. Corr. Facility, 6:19-cv-00028-JR, he has filed multiple motions in the case, he recently filed an Amended Complaint, and on April 23, 2019, the Court granted his request for the appointment of pro bono counsel. Accordingly, this Court concludes that plaintiff has failed to state a claim due to the absence of any facts giving rise to a reasonable inference that plaintiff has suffered an actual or imminent injury to court access.

         CONCLUSION

         Based on the foregoing, this Court dismisses plaintiffs Complaint (ECF No. 1) for failure to state a claim.

         Plaintiff may file an amended complaint, within thirty days of the date of this Order, curing the deficiency noted above. If plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint, the ...


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.