(PC) Bland v. State of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 30, 20212:19-cv-02100California1,491 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSHUA DAVIS BLAND, No. 2:19-CV-2100-JAM-DMC-P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief. ECF No. 22 The undersigned United States Magistrate Judge recommends denying the motion. I. PLAINTIFF’S ALLEGATIONS Plaintiff contends that he has been denied the right to correspond with co-plaintiffs. Id. at 1. He states that he has a First Amendment right to correspond with whom he wishes and to be free from arbitrary government interference in his personal pursuits. Id. Plaintiff concludes by stating that the First Amendment applies to the State of California by way of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Id. He then cites Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 74 (1906) to argue…

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.