Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00136/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00136-16/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

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

JOHN RAY DYNES,

Plaintiff,

v.

C/O JUAN MEDINA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-00136-GSA PC

ORDER DENYING MOTION REQUESTING

THAT THE COURT CONTACT THE

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT REGARDING

MISHANDLING OF PLAINTIFF’S LEGAL

DOCUMENTS

(Doc. 56)

This is a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Plaintiff John Ray Dynes,

a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the Fresno

County Jail. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s amended complaint, filed April 24, 2008,

against Defendants Medina and Williams for use of excessive physical force, in violation of the

Eighth Amendment. Plaintiff’s claim arises from an incident which occurred while he was

incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison. This matter is set for a telephonic trial confirmation

hearing on February 24, 2010, and jury trial on March 15, 2010. 

On January 26, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court contact the Sheriff’s

Department regarding the mishandling of his legal documents. In the motion, Plaintiff represents

that he mailed his pretrial statement on December 20, 2009, and implies that since it was not

received by the Court for filing, it was mishandled at the jail.

For reasons set forth fully in the Court’s second order to show cause, issued concurrently

with this order, the Court is skeptical that Plaintiff mailed what is purportedly his pretrial statement

1

Case 1:08-cv-00136-GSA Document 61 Filed 02/01/10 Page 1 of 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

on December 20, 2009. However, even assuming the truth of Plaintiff’s assertion that he did turn

the document over to jail officials for mailing, his motion requesting that the Court contact the

Sheriff’s Department over the matter is HEREBY ORDERED DENIED because there is no legal

basis supporting the form of relief sought and it is not otherwise appropriate. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 29, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:08-cv-00136-GSA Document 61 Filed 02/01/10 Page 2 of 2