Hogg

Hogg v. Sanchez

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 27, 20243:23-cv-06021California1,529 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

15 Plaintiff Roosevelt Hogg alleges that sheriff’s deputies used excessive force on him 16 in violation of the Eighth Amendment. His 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint containing these 17 allegations is now before me for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 18 Hogg has stated cognizable Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against 19 Alameda County Sheriff’s Office Deputies R. Nixon and R. Quinteros. All other 20 defendants and claims are DISMISSED. The Court directs defendants Nixon and 21 Quinteros to file in response to the complaint a dispositive motion, or a notice regarding 22 such motion, on or before July 8, 2024.

DISCUSSION

24 A. Standard of Review 25 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 26 prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a 27 governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 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…

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.