Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08150/USCOURTS-azd-3_09-cv-08150-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

JDDL-K

WO MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Rod Dennis Henricks, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Matrese Avila, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-8150-PCT-RCB (MEA)

ORDER

On September 3, 2009, Plaintiff Rod Dennis Henricks, who is confined in the Apache

County Jail in St. Johns, Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In a September 21, 2009 Order,

the Court granted the Application to Proceed and dismissed the Complaint because Plaintiff

had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Court gave Plaintiff 30

days to file a first amended complaint that cured the deficiencies identified in the Order.

On October 21, 2009, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (Doc. #6). The Court

will dismiss the First Amended Complaint with leave to amend.

I. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against

a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff has raised

claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 1 of 7
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

JDDL-K - 2 -

be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the

pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does not

demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009).

“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements, do not suffice.” Id.

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a

claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,

550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content

that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the

misconduct alleged.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for

relief [is] . . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial

experience and common sense.” Id. at 1950. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual

allegations may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there

are other “more likely explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 1951.

If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other facts,

a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal of the

action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The Court

should not, however, advise the litigant how to cure the defects. This type of advice “would

undermine district judges’ role as impartial decisionmakers.” Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225,

231 (2004); see also Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1131 n.13 (declining to decide whether the court was

required to inform a litigant of deficiencies). Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint will be

dismissed for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend because the First Amended

Complaint may possibly be saved by amendment.

. . . .

. . . .

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 2 of 7
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

JDDL-K - 3 -

II. First Amended Complaint

A first amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963

F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542,

1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will treat an original complaint as

nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the original

complaint is waived if it is not raised in a first amended complaint. ” King v. Atiyeh, 814

F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987). Thus, the Court will consider only the information in the First

Amended Complaint.

In his one-count First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff sues the following Defendants

at the Apache County Jail: Commander Matrese Avila, Sergeant Rubin Garcia, and Corporal

C. Bond. Plaintiff alleges he was denied his right to attorney-client confidentiality. He

claims that his attorney had advised him that Plaintiff should get any vital information to the

attorney as soon as possible. Plaintiff alleges that he had important information and tried to

obtain an envelope so he could write to his attorney and provide the information, but Plaintiff

is indigent and Defendants Garcia and Bond told him that, “per [Defendant] Avila,” Plaintiff

would not receive another envelope until the following Tuesday because he was only entitled

to one envelope for his lawyer per week. Consequently, Plaintiff states that he wrote to his

attorney on a postcard and he now feels that his “lawyer client confidential[]ity was

damaged” and that it will be “hard to get a fair trial.” Plaintiff also claims that he was unable

to call his attorney because he is indigent, he could not afford a phone card, and the phones

to which he had access did not allow him to call collect.

In his Request for Relief, Plaintiff seeks “jail reform,” a fair trial, and monetary

damages.

III. Failure to State a Claim

“Indigent inmates have a constitutional right to meaningful access to the courts.”

King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 568 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817,

821-23 (1977)). This includes access to a lawyer for trial, paper and pen to draft legal

documents, and stamps to mail them. Bounds, 430 U.S. at 824-25. However, inmates “do

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 3 of 7
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

JDDL-K - 4 -

not have an unlimited right to free postage in connection with the right of access to the

courts.” White v. White , 886 F.2d 721, 723 -724 (4th Cir. 1989) (quoting Twyman v. Crisp,

584 F.2d 352, 359 (10th Cir.1978)). The government can adopt “reasonable postage stamp

regulations.” King, 814 F.2d at 568.

In addition, prisoners do not have a right to any particular mean of access to the court.

See Aswegan v. Henry, 981 F.2d 313, 314 (8th Cir. 1992). There is “no established

minimum requirement that a state must meet in order to provide indigent inmates with

adequate access to the courts.” King, 814 F.2d at 568. A court must determine whether the

individual inmate before the court has been denied meaningful access. Id.

To establish that he was denied meaningful access to the courts, a plaintiff must

submit evidence showing that he suffered an “actual injury” as a result of the defendants’

actions. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996). An “actual injury” is “actual prejudice

with respect to contemplated or existing litigation, such as the inability to meet a filing

deadline or to present a claim.” Id. at 348.

Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that being limited to one envelope per week to

correspond with his attorney denied him access to the courts. Although he claims that he was

unable to call his attorney to relay the allegedly important information, it is unclear why

Plaintiff did not use to a postcard to request that his attorney call Plaintiff or visit Plaintiff at

the jail. Cf. Pino v. Dalsheim, 558 F. Supp. 673, 674-75 (S.D.N.Y. 1983) (although plaintiff

and his attorney would have preferred to communicate by telephone, the state “is not

obligated to provide the best manner of access,” and, therefore, there was no constitutional

violation where inmate was limited to two, eight-minute phone conversations per month but

was allowed unlimited mail correspondence with his attorney and unlimited private visits).

Nor has Plaintiff demonstrated that he suffered an actual injury. His allegation that he “feel[s]

that it will be hard to get a fair trial” because he “had” to relay information via postcard to his

attorney is entirely conclusory and speculative. See Ivey v. Board of Regents of the

University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982) (conclusory and vague allegations

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 4 of 7
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

JDDL-K - 5 -

will not support a cause of action). Therefore, the Court will dismiss the First Amended

Complaint.

IV. Leave to Amend

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint will be dismissed for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Within 30 days, Plaintiff may

submit a second amended complaint to cure the deficiencies outlined above. The Clerk of

Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form to use for filing a second amended complaint.

If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form, the Court may strike the second amended

complaint and dismiss this action without further notice to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “Second

Amended Complaint.” The second amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its

entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original

Complaint or First Amended Complaint by reference. Plaintiff may include only one claim

per count.

A second amended complaint supersedes the original Complaint and First Amended

Complaint. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262; Hal Roach Studios, 896 F.2d at 1546. After

amendment, the Court will treat the original Complaint and First Amended Complaint as

nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the original

Complaint or First Amended Complaint is waived if it is not raised in a second amended

complaint. King, 814 F.2d at 567.

V. Warnings

A. Release

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay

the balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result

in dismissal of this action.

. . . .

. . . .

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 5 of 7
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

JDDL-K - 6 -

B. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

C. Copies

Plaintiff must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See

LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice

to Plaintiff.

D. Possible “Strike”

Because the First Amended Complaint has been dismissed for failure to state a claim,

if Plaintiff fails to file a second amended complaint correcting the deficiencies identified in

this Order, the dismissal may count as a “strike” under the “3-strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). Under the 3-strikes provision, a prisoner may not bring a civil action or appeal

a civil judgment in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 “if the prisoner has, on 3 or more

prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in

a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious,

or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

E. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 F.2d at

1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the

Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (Doc. #6) is dismissed for failure to state

a claim. Plaintiff has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a second amended

complaint in compliance with this Order.

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 6 of 7
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

JDDL-K - 7 -

(2) If Plaintiff fails to file a second amended complaint within 30 days, the Clerk

of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with

prejudice that states that the dismissal may count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

(3) The Clerk of Court must mail Plaintiff a court-approved form for filing a civil

rights complaint by a prisoner.

Dated this 7th day of November, 2009.

 

Case 3:09-cv-08150-RCB--MEA Document 7 Filed 11/10/09 Page 7 of 7