Case: Rhinehard v. Rowland

3:90-cv-02335 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Aug. 15, 1990

Closed Date: 1996

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 15, 1990, an inmate at the Pelican Bay State Prison in Crescent City, California, filed a pro se lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the California Department of Corrections under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages, alleging that the defendants had violated his constitutional rights by placing him in solitary confinement indefinitely on charges that he was a member of…

On August 15, 1990, an inmate at the Pelican Bay State Prison in Crescent City, California, filed a pro se lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the California Department of Corrections under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages, alleging that the defendants had violated his constitutional rights by placing him in solitary confinement indefinitely on charges that he was a member of a prison gang. He alleged that this violated his right to due process because he was not allowed to challenge the basis for his segregation and because solitary confinement made him ineligible for parole. He also alleged that his solitary confinement (over nine years) was cruel and unusual, causing him mental problems as well as denying him necessary exercise and contact visitation with his family.

On December 12, 1990, the District Court (Judge Marilyn Hall Patel) issued an order giving the plaintiff 45 days to amend his complaint, but the plaintiff failed to do so. On November 17, 1992, the Court dismissed the plaintiff's challenge to the length of his sentence due to failure to exhaust state judicial remedies. The court also dismissed as frivolous the plaintiff's Eighth Amendment Claim and gave the plaintiff 45 days to amend his complaint for damages. Rhinehard v. Rowland, Nos. 90-2335, 92-0240, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20459 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 17, 1992).

On July 5, 1994, the District Court (Judge Barbara A. Caulfield) granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment as to the plaintiff's claim regarding the denial of exercise but denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment as to the plaintiff's due process claim regarding administrative segregation. Rhinehart v. Gomez, Nos. 90-2335, 92-0240, 1994 WL 377962 (N.D.Cal. July 5, 1994).

On October 17, 1995, the District Court (Judge Vaughn R. Walker) dismissed the case as moot due to the defendants' recent imposition of a 48-month disciplinary term in the solitary housing as punishment for the plaintiff's assault on a prison guard. Rhinehart v. Gomez, No. 90-2335, 1995 WL 630011 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 17, 1995). The plaintiff appealed, and on February 26, 1996, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal.

We have no further information on this case.

Summary Authors

Kristen Sagar (9/8/2006)

People


Judge(s)

Caulfield, Barbara A. (California)

Patel, Marilyn Hall (California)

Walker, Vaughn R. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bolandgray, Azar A. (California)

Gifford, Paul D. (California)

Slavin, Bruce Michael (California)

Judge(s)

Caulfield, Barbara A. (California)

Patel, Marilyn Hall (California)

Walker, Vaughn R. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bolandgray, Azar A. (California)

Gifford, Paul D. (California)

Slavin, Bruce Michael (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

Rhinehart v. Gomez

July 5, 1994 Docket

Docket (PACER)

Rhinehard v. Gomez

April 3, 1996 Docket

Order

1992 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 20459

Nov. 17, 1992 Order/Opinion
24

Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment

1994 WL 377962, 1994 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 9218

July 5, 1994 Order/Opinion
58

Order

1995 WL 6300011, 1995 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 15562

Oct. 17, 1995 Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT (No process) Fee status ifpp entered on 1/7/92 () (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/07/1992)

Jan. 7, 1992
1

In forma pauperis Affidavit (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/07/1992)

Jan. 7, 1992
2

LETTER dated 1/14/92 from Micheal Rhinehart re case status (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/24/1992)

Jan. 22, 1992
3

LETTER dated 1/22/92 from writ clerk to Micheal Rhinehart (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 01/24/1992)

Jan. 22, 1992
4

LETTER dated 5/18/92 from Micheal Rhinehart re: status (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/02/1992)

May 29, 1992
5

LETTER dated 6/1/92 from writ clerk to Micheal Rhinehart (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 06/05/1992)

June 1, 1992
6

LETTER dated 10/6/92 from Micheal Rhinehart re: status of case (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/15/1992)

Oct. 14, 1992
7

LETTER dated 10/18/92 from Micheal Rhinehart re: status (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/23/1992)

Oct. 21, 1992
8

LETTER dated 10/21/92 from writ clerk to Micheal Rhinehart re: status and docket sheet (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 10/23/1992)

Oct. 21, 1992
9

ORDER by Judge Barbara A. Caulfield consolidating case with 90-2335 ( Date Entered: 11/18/92) (cc: all counsel) (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/18/1992)

Nov. 16, 1992
10

ORDER by Judge Barbara A. Caulfield dismissing case as claims to be decided in lead case 90-2335; appeal filing ddl 8/8/94 ( Date Entered: 7/7/94) (cc: all counsel) [3:92-cv-00240] (ml, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 07/07/1994)

July 5, 1994

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Prison Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 15, 1990

Closing Date: 1996

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

California state prisonerstating claims for denial of exercise in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights, and for denial of due process by his retention in administrative segregation

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: Yes

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Pelican Bay State Prison (Crescent City), State

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Administrative segregation

Classification / placement

Disciplinary segregation

Recreation / Exercise

Visiting

Medical/Mental Health:

Mental health care, general

Type of Facility:

Government-run