McCullock

McCullock v. Brown

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 3, 20203:18-cv-00548California3,008 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

21 Plaintiff Robert McCullock is a prisoner currently incarcerated at Richard J. 22 Donovan Correctional Facility (“RJDCF”) and proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 23 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 24 On June 12, 2017, RJDCF inmate Andrew Cejas filed a prison grievance on behalf 25 of himself and six other inmates, including Plaintiff (the “Group Appeal”). (Ex. B, 26 Declaration of T. Ramos in Support of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment 27 (“Ramos Decl.”), ECF No. 58-2 at 12, 16). In the Group Appeal, RJD-D-17-3023, the 28 inmates alleged that Defendant Robert Brown violated the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) by failing to provide “a chaplain for supervision of [w]eekly Buddhist services in the chapel” and failing to provide an “alternative indoor area” for services if a chaplain or volunteer supervisor is not available. (Id. at 14, 16). The inmates requested that RJDCF provide chapel access or an alternative indoor area for weekly Buddhist services and that RJDCF…

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.