Russell E. Newman v. James Roland, and Charles D. Marshall, Warden, Counselor Dillard C. Johnson and Peetz

66 F.3d 335 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Russell E. NEWMAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. James ROLAND, Defendant, and Charles D. Marshall, Warden, Counselor Dillard; C. Johnson; and Peetz, Defendants/Appellees. No. 93-15116. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 12, 1994. Decided July 11, 1995. Before: BOOCHEVER, NORRIS, and HALL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Russell E. Newman, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action, one part on summary judgment and another part as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915 (d). 3 Newman filed this civil rights suit against ten California Department of Corrections officials in 1990, alleging numerous constitutional violations. He claimed that his conditions of confinement at California State Prison, Corcoran, and at Pelican Bay State Prison constituted a serious threat to his mental health and that certain prison officials…