Peterson

(PC) Poynter v. Peterson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 20212:21-cv-00012California719 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARKICE POYNTER, No. 2:21-cv-0012-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER

B. PETERSON, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After two dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (ECF No. 8 & 15), plaintiff has filed an amended complaint (ECF No. 16, titled “first amended complaint”), which too must be dismissed with leave to amend.1 Like the prior complaints, the amended complaint concerns plaintiff’s transfer from High Desert State Prison to Ironwood State Prison. He claims that because of his daily “heat medication,” he has a serious medical need to be housed in a cooler climate. He claims that on March 6, 2020, he passed out in his cell due to poor air flow, no running water, and extreme heat.

1 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental…

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.