Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05672/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05672-17/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYNE RICHARDSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. JURCAK, E. PEARCH, RICKS,

R. MYERS, S. DAY, AND G. DOSER,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:02-cv-05672-LJO PC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF

INVOLVEMENT IN PRIOR BATTERY

INCIDENTS, SUBJECT TO USE ON

REBUTTAL SUPPORTED BY COMPETENT

EVIDENCE

(Doc. 97)

Plaintiff Wayne Richardson (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This is an action for damages

proceeding on plaintiff’s complaint, filed June 6, 2002, against defendants C. Jurcak, E. Pearch,

Ricks, R. Myers, S. Day, and G. Doser (“defendants”) on plaintiff’s claim that defendants violated

plaintiff’s rights under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution on August 9, 1999,

when they failed to protect plaintiff prior to and during the course of an attack on plaintiff by inmate

Moore. 

Plaintiff contends that he was stabbed as a result of an ongoing dispute between the Crips and

the Bloods (two established prison gangs) of which defendants should have been aware. Defendants

seeks to offer the alternate theory that plaintiff was stabbed in retaliation for prior occasions in which

plaintiff was involved in batteries on other inmates. Pursuant to discussion during the telephonic

trial confirmation hearing held on January 4, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. and subject to the Court’s order filed

January 4, 2007, defendants were given until 4:00 p.m. on January 8, 2007, within which to provide

Case 1:02-cv-05672-NEW Document 105 Filed 01/10/07 Page 1 of 3
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

2

plaintiff and the Court with copies of their documentaryevidence establishing a link between the two

incidents of battery involving plaintiff and the incident on August 9, 1999. Defendants were

informed that if they were unable to cite any evidence establishing a link between the events, in

support of their theories concerning motivation and retaliation, plaintiff’s motion to exclude

evidence of these battery incidents would be granted. On January 8, 2007, defendants submitted the

evidence they assert establishes the link.

It is undisputed that plaintiff was a member of the Crips at the time of the incident at issue

in this action. (Undisputed Fact 11.) Defendants assert that plaintiff is linked to an incident on

November 14, 1996, in which inmate Smith, who has been identified as a member of the Bloods,

was stabbed, and that plaintiff acted in concert with inmate Horton, who has been identified as a Crip

from the Compton area. With respect to the June 29, 1997, incident, defendants assert that plaintiff

acted in concert with a number of inmates, including Horton, a member of the Crips. 

The Rules Violation Reports concerning both incidents, which are on defendants’ exhibit list

and may be used at trial, contain no information that the incidents were gang related and contain no

information concerning gang affiliation of any involved inmates. The RVRs show that on November

14, 1996, plaintiff and inmate Horton were involved in a battery on inmate Smith, and on June 29,

1997, plaintiff, inmate Horton, and other inmates were involved in a battery on inmate Grajales.

These documents do not support the existence of the link defendants purport exists between the

events, and the evidence defendants submit to establish that inmate Smith was a Blood and inmate

Horton was a Crip is not provided for in the Pretrial Order, as Lewis and Young are not listed as

potential witnesses and the documents referred to by Lewis and Young in their declarations are not

on defendants’ exhibit list.

Defendants have not met their burden of establishing a link between the events, and

plaintiff’s motion to exclude evidence of his involvement in the battery incidents on November 14,

///

///

///

///

Case 1:02-cv-05672-NEW Document 105 Filed 01/10/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

1996, and June 29, 1997, is GRANTED, subject to use by defendants on rebuttal if supported by

competent evidence.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05672-NEW Document 105 Filed 01/10/07 Page 3 of 3