Scully

(PC) Reed v. Scully

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 27, 20232:22-cv-01169California1,979 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TAMECUS REED, No. 2:22-cv-1169 KJM DB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS JAN SCULLY, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims video used in criminal proceedings against him were altered. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s amended complaint (ECF No. 10) for screening. For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned will recommend that the amended complaint be dismissed without leave to amend.

SCREENING

I. Legal Standards

23 The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a 24 governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 25 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims 26 that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be 27 granted, or…

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.