Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00290/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00290-23/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Durrell A. Puckett is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Both parties have consented to United States magistrate judge 

jurisdiction. (ECF No. 46.)

On July 25, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting to communicate with witnesses prior to 

trial. 

There is no authority for Plaintiff’s position that as an incarcerated litigant he has the right to 

communicate with other inmates who may testify at trial. Lawful incarceration necessarily limits 

many of the privileges and rights based on the considerations of the penal system. Price v. Johnson, 

334 U.S. 266, 285-286 (1948). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has held that an incarcerated pro se 

defendant’s access to legal materials and witnesses is not absolute and must be “balanced against the 

legitimate security needs or resource constraints of the prison.” United States v. Sarno, 73 F.3d 1470, 

1491 (9th Cir. 1995) (citation omitted). The Court finds the balancing of the prisoner’s right to access 

DURRELL A. PUCKETT,

 Plaintiff,

v.

K. BRANDON,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00290-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO COMMUNICATE WITH WITNESSES 

PRIOR TO TRIAL

[ECF No. 75]

Case 1:14-cv-00290-SAB Document 77 Filed 08/03/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

and the prison’s security concerns applies with equal force to cases-such as this one-involving a pro se 

plaintiff. See Valandingham v. Bojorquez, 866 F.2d 1135, 1141 (9th Cir. 1989) (Plaintiff prisoner 

“litigating pro se has the right to undertake the legal investigation and documentation of his claims in 

the manner that an attorney would, subject to the security and disciplinary requirements of a prison.”) 

(emphasis added). There is no enforceable right to communicate with other incarcerated witnesses. 

However, Plaintiff is not prevented from communicating with his inmate witnesses prior to trial by 

written mail and presentation of documentation to prepare for trial. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion 

requesting a court order to communicate with witnesses prior to October 11, 2016, is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 2, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00290-SAB Document 77 Filed 08/03/16 Page 2 of 2