From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Larson v. McDonald

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 22, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1955 JAM GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 22, 2008)

Summary

alleging he was improperly transferred from High Desert State Prison to the California Correctional Institution—magistrate recommends dismissal

Summary of this case from Larson v. Barber

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-1955 JAM GGH P.

July 22, 2008


FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS


Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is the second amended complaint filed June 20, 2008. For the following reasons, the court recommends that this action be dismissed.

The second amended complaint suffers from the same pleading defects as the first amended complaint. Plaintiff again alleges that he was improperly transferred from High Desert State Prison (HDSP) to the California Correctional Institution (CCI). Plaintiff alleges that his classification score required that he be housed at a prison with a lower security score than CCI. Plaintiff suggests that CCI is more dangerous than a lower security prison.

Inmates do not have a constitutional right to be housed at a particular institution or facility or to be transferred, or not transferred, from one facility or institution to another. Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 244-48, 103 S.Ct. 1741 (1983); Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 224-25, 96 S.Ct. 2532 (1976). Nor does an inmate have a constitutional right to a particular classification. Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78, 88 n. 9, 97 S.Ct. 274 (1976).

Based on the standards set forth above, the court finds that plaintiff's claim that he was improperly transferred to CCI based on his classification score does not state a colorable claim for relief. Because it does not appear that plaintiff can cure this pleading defect, the court recommends that this action be dismissed.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with prejudice.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Larson v. McDonald

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 22, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1955 JAM GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 22, 2008)

alleging he was improperly transferred from High Desert State Prison to the California Correctional Institution—magistrate recommends dismissal

Summary of this case from Larson v. Barber
Case details for

Larson v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:HARVEY EUGENE LARSON, Plaintiff, v. McDONALD, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 22, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-1955 JAM GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 22, 2008)

Citing Cases

Larson v. Barber

AWI WMW PC) 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis 81555 (claiming he is illegally housed in administrative segregation—claims…