McKie v. Salinas Valley State Prison

Background

Cody Lee McKie filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a law that allows claims for violations of federal rights by people acting under state authority. He alleged that Salinas Valley State Prison Correctional Officers Cabillero and DeFranco threatened to write him up if he did not move back into a cell with his cellmate, Duckett. McKie alleged that Duckett later brutalized him on November 18, 2024.

Screening and Legal Standard

Because the complaint involved a governmental entity, the court reviewed it before further proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. At this screening stage, the court must dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also said that pleadings filed without a lawyer are read liberally, but a complaint must still include enough factual matter to make liability plausible.

For a claim that prison officials failed to protect a prisoner from another prisoner, the Eighth Amendment requires allegations showing both a sufficiently serious risk of harm and deliberate indifference. Deliberate indifference means that an official knew facts from which the official could infer that a substantial risk of serious harm existed and actually drew that inference.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that McKie’s allegations did not show deliberate indifference. His statement that Cabillero and DeFranco forced him to live with Duckett and that Duckett later attacked him did not include specific facts showing that the officers knew Duckett posed a substantial risk of serious harm to McKie and understood that risk.

The court instructed McKie that an amended complaint must explain the basis for his claim, including what the officers knew about Duckett’s dangerousness and the substantial risk Duckett posed. It must also describe the attack, including how, where, and when it began and what injuries McKie suffered.

Disposition

Judge William H. Orrick dismissed the complaint with leave to file an amended complaint by December 8, 2025. The amended complaint must use the caption and case number stated in the order, identify itself as a “FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT” on the first page, include all claims and defendants McKie wishes to pursue, and completely replace the earlier complaint. McKie may not incorporate material from the earlier complaint by reference. The court warned that failure to file a proper amended complaint by the deadline may result in dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.