Yocum

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The petition alleges appellant’s personal property was “illegally seized and retained” by respondent Corrections Officer Howard. In supporting documents, it appears the officer removed certain items from appellant’s locker in September 2011, believing them to be contraband devices to recharge cell phones. (Appellant acknowledges in these documents that the items were not unlawfully seized.) After prison officials conducted an initial investigation, an officer told appellant the items would be returned to him at the completion of the formal investigative process, and they have not yet been returned. According to the supplemental documents, appellant filed various administrative appeals, all of which eventually were dismissed or “cancelled” as untimely. Appellant filed his petition on February 28, 2012. By order of June 25, 2012, the court determined, pursuant to the authority of Escamilla v. Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 498, 509, that appellant’s petition for writ relief was appropriately characterized as a petition for writ of mandamus. Because the petition did not allege defendant had fully exhausted his…