Newsom

Miller v. Newsom

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 20215:20-cv-08021California777 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

22 A. Standard of Review 23 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 24 prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 25 governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any 26 cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 27 upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See id. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must, however, be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). B. Plaintiff’s Claims Plaintiff is a state inmate currently incarcerated at the Salinas Valley State Prison. Dkt. No. 1 at 1. Plaintiff is suing Governor Gavin Newsom…

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.