HARRINGTON-WISELY

HARRINGTON-WISELY v. State

Good Law
156 Cal. App. 4th 1488·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1890·68 Cal. Rptr. 3d 209
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 20, 2007B190431California3,861 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perluss, J.

Gail Marie Harrington-Wisely and several additional plaintiffs (collectively, Wisely) appeal from the stipulated judgment entered after the trial court granted summary adjudication on 10 causes of action in favor of the State of California, the California Department of Corrections (CDC) (now California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation; Gov. Code, § 12838), the California State Prison at Lancaster and several prison officials (collectively, government defendants) in this action arising out of the search of visitors to 11 California prisons. We dismiss Wisely’s appeal because the stipulated judgment is not an appealable judgment or order.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. California State Prisons’ X-ray and Search of Visitors

From 1999 through March 2001, 11 institutions operated by the CDC required all visitors to pass through a backscatter X-ray machine, the Secure 1000, as a means of detecting concealed weapons and contraband, such as money and narcotics. The Secure 1000 discharged low-level backscatter X-rays that penetrated a few centimeters into a person’s skin, producing a spectral-like computer image of the body, including an outline of breasts,…

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.