Woodford

(HC) (DP) Riel v. Woodford

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 20202:01-cv-00507California367 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHARLES D. RIEL, No. 2:01-cv-0507 MCE DB Petitioner, DEATH PENALTY CASE v. WARDEN, San Quentin State Prison, ORDER Respondent. 16 On January 2, 2020 the undersigned received a handwritten filing from the petitioner, Charles Riel. (ECF No. 588.) The court notes that petitioner is represented by counsel in this action and pro se filings by a represented party are improper. See United States v. Gwiazdzinski, 141 F.3d 784, 787 (7th Cir. 1998). Petitioner should address any issues regarding this action with his attorney. Accordingly, the court will deny the request made in petitioner’s pro se filing. Additionally, petitioner stated several complaints related to petitioner’s conditions of confinement. To the extent petitioner seeks to challenge his conditions of confinement he may exhaust all available administrative remedies and file an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Crawford v. Bell, 599 F.2d 890, 891-92 (9th Cir. 1979)…

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.