Clay Joseph Jones v. Brandon Price, Executive Director of Coalinga State Hospital in his individual capacity; Pam Ahlin, Executive in her individual capacity; Aldo Mendez; Kevin Adams; Chang Lee, M.D., and Does 1-10
Published: Sep. 15, 2023 | Result Date: Feb. 9, 2023 | Filing Date: Aug. 11, 2021 |Case number: 1:21-cv-01212-AWI-SAB Bench Decision – Dismissal
Judge
Court
USDC Eastern District of California
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Greg W. Garrotto
(Law Offices of Greg W. Garrotto)
Defendant
Jason R. Cale
(Office of the Attorney General)
Facts
In 2004, after Plaintiff Clay Joseph Jones was detained at a secure facility pursuant to California's Sexually Violent Predator Act (SVPA), probable cause was found to detain him until an adjudication could be made as to his SVP status. Plaintiff was transferred to Coalinga State Hospital, which is owned and operated by California's Department of State Hospitals (DSH). He was brought to trial in 2017, and on June 6, 2018, a jury deemed him an SVP. He filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. The Sacramento County Superior Court granted the petition, finding that his approximately 14-year detention violated his constitutional rights. The Court of Appeal affirmed but found that instead of a 14-year delay, Plaintiff suffered a 10-year delay for his trial. In August 2019, the court issued an order for immediate release, and he was released from custody.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging claims for retaliation, deprivation of property without due process, unsafe housing, involuntary subjection to psychotropic medication, deprivation of food and water, and denial of medical treatment.
DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the Complaint failed to plead actionable conduct by Defendants; that the statute of limitations barred Plaintiff's claims; and that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.
Result
The court found that Plaintiff did not allege sufficient factual matter to plausibly state any of his claims, but it granted him another opportunity to amend. The court further ordered that failure to timely file a second amended complaint would result in the withdrawal of leave to amend and closure of the case. Plaintiff did not file a timely second amended complaint. Pursuant to its previous order, the court withdrew leave to amend and dismissed the case.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390