Pedersen

Pedersen v. Plummer

Good Law
120 F. App'x 665
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 28, 2004No. 03-15721; D.C. No. C 02-2552 CRB (PR)California828 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff Paul Arthur Pedersen (“Pedersen”) appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action against several Alameda County officials. He seeks damages for violations of his constitutional rights during four one- to two-month periods in 1997, 1999, 2000, and 2002, when Pedersen was housed among the general criminal inmate population at the Alameda County Jail while undergoing civil commitment proceedings pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA). Pedersen alleges that he should have been housed at the acute psychiatric facility in the North County Jail, where he could receive treatment ordered by the court. Instead, he was assigned to the Santa Rita Facility, where he was housed with criminal inmates and was not provided treatment. According to Pedersen, defendant Plummer acted in knowing violation of the court order that required treatment for Pedersen.

Proceeding in forma pauperis, Pedersen filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action claiming that the defendant officials violated his substantive due process rights by interrupting his treatment regimen, and violated his equal protection rights by treating him worse than other…

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.