Tingle

Tingle v. Defilippis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 18, 20244:24-cv-02543California1,044 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 AARON KRISTOPHER TINGLE, Case No. 24-cv-02543-HSG

Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL v.

STEVE DEFILIPPIS, Defendant.

12 Plaintiff, a prisoner housed at Santa Rita Jail, has filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his court-appointed counsel, Steve DeFilippis, denied him his Sixth Amendment right to counsel by providing ineffective assistance of counsel. His complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is now before the Court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a separate order. DISCUSSION I. Standard of Review A federal court must engage in a preliminary screening of any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity, or from an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the Court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.