Inouye

Inouye v. Kemna

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 3, 200706-15474California5,609 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

Inouye, who had a methamphetamine addiction and had been sentenced for drug crimes, was released on parole on November 20, 2000. The events of that parole term form the background for this case.

A.

Inouye had long objected to compelled participation in religion-based drug treatment programs. In June of 2000, while imprisoned, he filed suit against state officials over his placement in such treatment programs in prison.3 1 We refer to both the original plaintiff and the present appellant as “In- ouye” throughout this opinion, even though Ricky Inouye is now deceased. 2 Inouye also appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment against him on a Fourth Amendment claim related to a separate incident. We address this portion of his appeal in a memorandum disposition filed concurrently with this opinion. 3 The prison case, Inouye v. Cayetano, Civ. No. 00-00412, began with a complaint filed on June 13, 2000. Nanamori was added to the prison case in the third amended complaint, filed June 8, 2001, which included the First Amendment issues arising from the parole term incidents now before us. Judge Mollway initially held that Nanamori was not entitled to…

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.