Webber v. Barrios

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations and dismissed Doyal Webber’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The court concluded that the amended complaint failed to allege a cognizable due process or First Amendment retaliation claim concerning prison disciplinary proceedings. The Clerk was directed to close the case.

Holdings

1. The first amended complaint failed to state a due process claim because plaintiff challenged the merits of the disciplinary finding rather than alleging that he was denied constitutionally required process, and he did not allege facts showing that the disciplinary finding lacked the required evidentiary support.
2. The first amended complaint failed to state a First Amendment retaliation claim because plaintiff did not identify constitutionally protected conduct or explain how that conduct triggered the alleged retaliatory actions.
3. Plaintiff's challenge to Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3023 did not state a constitutional claim because he failed to provide sufficient factual matter connecting the regulation or its application to a constitutional violation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the first amended complaint stated a cognizable due process claim based on plaintiff's prison disciplinary proceedings.
2. Whether the first amended complaint stated a First Amendment retaliation claim.
3. Whether plaintiff's challenge to Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3023 stated a constitutional claim independent of due process.

Disposition

dismissed