Pesce

(PC) Montezello v. Pesce

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 12, 20222:21-cv-00906California257 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RAYMOND MONTEZELLO aka ROY A. No. 2:21-cv-00906-KJM-EFB (PC)

MONTES,

12 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 14 PESCE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has filed a “Request for Investigation under the CRIPA Act,” citing 42 U.S.C. § 1997. ECF No. 29. As discussed below, the court cannot grant plaintiff’s requested relief, and his motion is therefore denied. The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (“CRIPA”) does not authorize a private right of action. See McRorie v. Shimoda, 795 F.2d 780, 782 n. 3 (9th Cir. 1986); Cooper v. Sumner, 672 F. Supp. 1361, 1367 (D. Nev. 1987). Rather, it permits the Attorney General of the United States to institute or intervene in a civil action to protect institutionalized persons against a pattern of violations of their rights. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997a-c. CRIPA does not authorize this court to order an investigation on plaintiff’s behalf.…

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.