Decker

(PC) White v. Decker

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 10, 20252:24-cv-01685California2,074 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILSON LEBRANDON WHITE, 2:24-cv-1685-TLN-CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER DECKER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Wilson LeBrandon White proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. This matter is referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s third amended complaint (ECF No. 17) is before the court for screening. Plaintiff states a claim under the Fourteenth Amendment against defendant Decker related to plaintiff’s conditions of confinement in an unsanitary cell at the Shasta County Jail for 48 hours. No other claims are stated. Plaintiff may proceed on this claim against defendant Decker or take a final opportunity to amend under the guidelines set forth below. I. Screening Requirement Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the court must screen every in forma pauperis proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief…

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.