Rodriguez

Rodriguez v. Koenig

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 31, 20204:19-cv-01273California4,980 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

10 Plaintiff Cesar A. Rodriguez, a former state prisoner who was previously incarcerated at 11 the Correctional Training Facility (“CTF”), brings the instant pro se civil rights action, pursuant to 12 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging constitutional violations stemming from when he was denied parole at 13 his seventh subsequent parole consideration hearing before the California Board of Parole 14 Hearings (“BPH” or “Board”) on June 13, 2017. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages. 15 In an Order dated October 11, 2019, the Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint stated 16 cognizable due process claim against BPH Commissioner Pete Labahn and BPH Deputy 17 Commissioner James Martin for “‘ignor[ing] their established procedures and statutes’ as required 18 by state law, thereby violating [Plaintiff’s] rights to due process by ‘depriving him of an actual 19 length of incarceration that matches his culpability, reformation, and offense . . . .’” Dkt. 9 at 2 20 (citing Dkt. 1 at 3). The Court dismissed all claims against Defendant CTF Warden Craig Koenig 21 because Plaintiff did not allege that this Defendant actually or proximately caused the deprivation 22 of any federally…

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.