Watrous

(PC) Richson-Bey v. Watrous

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 12, 20211:21-cv-01482California525 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 SEAN J. RICHSON-BEY, 1:21-cv-01482-GSA-PC

Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS BARRED BY

v. HECK V. HUMPHREY, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) and EDWARDS v. BALISOK, 520 U.S. 641 (1997). WATROUS, et al., (ECF No. 1.) Defendants. 30 DAY DEADLINE

15 Plaintiff, Sean J. Richson-Bey, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff complains of having been wrongly charged and found guilty of delaying a peace officer in the performance of duties after being issued a Rules Violation Report (“RVR”). (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff alleges that he is completely innocent of this charge; that he was not allowed to present a defense; and that he was found guilty of the Rules Violation and assessed thirty days loss of credit. Plaintiff seeks an order declaring that his constitutional rights were violated and awarding him monetary damages. When a prisoner…

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.