Eric Gonzalez v. P. Mullen

Good Law
446 F. App'x 17
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 26, 201110-16311California457 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Eric Lamont Gonzalez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging numerous constitutional violations against prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 584 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Gonzalez’s Eighth Amendment claim concerning the prison’s policy of shutting off an inmate’s toilet for an hour upon overuse because Gonzalez failed to allege facts suggesting that he suffered a sufficiently serious deprivation. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (to state an Eighth Amendment claim a prisoner must show the denial of “the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

Dismissal of Gonzalez’s First Amendment claims was proper because, to the extent that Gonzalez…

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.