Johnson v. San Mateo County

Background

Sheldon Johnson, a state prisoner confined at the Maguire Correctional Facility, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and its individual members. He alleged that “Sheriff County Authorities” stopped all inmates’ incoming postal mail at the facility on April 4, 2021, after an alleged attempt to smuggle strips of Suboxone through the mail. Johnson said the shutdown affected letters from family, friends, children, and businesses. He sought damages, an order requiring relief from the alleged violation, and appointment of counsel.

The court stated that it was required to screen the complaint because Johnson was a prisoner suing governmental defendants. At this screening stage, the court had to identify claims that were legally sufficient and dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought money from an immune defendant. The court also said it would read a self-represented litigant’s allegations liberally.

Claims and analysis

The opinion explained that prisoners have a First Amendment right to send and receive mail. Prison mail rules or practices may nevertheless limit that right when they are reasonably related to legitimate prison-management interests. The opinion also explained that when prison officials withhold incoming mail, prisoners generally have a due-process right to notice that the mail is being withheld.

The court found Johnson’s allegations insufficient for two main reasons. First, he did not specifically allege that the Board or its individual members participated in the decision to stop incoming mail. His allegations instead attributed the decision to “Sheriff Authorities.” The court stated that the appropriate defendants for the First Amendment claim would be the state actors at the facility who made the decision, rather than the Board, unless Johnson could allege a basis for liability against the defendants he named.

Second, the allegations suggested that the mail shutdown was related to a legitimate prison-management interest—preventing contraband from entering the facility. The court said Johnson therefore needed to allege facts showing that the responsible officials’ actions were not reasonably related to that interest. The court also said he might be able to state a due-process claim by alleging that he was not given notice that his incoming mail would be withheld.

The court further noted that Johnson might not have exhausted the available prison grievance procedures before filing suit. It advised that he must have exhausted those remedies for the First Amendment claim and any other claim before proceeding. If he had not exhausted them, the opinion stated that the action would have to be dismissed without prejudice, allowing a new action after exhaustion. The court permitted Johnson to state in an amended complaint that he had exhausted remedies if he had done so since filing the case.

Appointment of counsel

The court denied Johnson’s request for appointed counsel. It stated that there is generally no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case and that counsel may be appointed for an indigent litigant only in exceptional circumstances. The court found that Johnson had identified no grounds warranting appointment of counsel and denied the motion for lack of exceptional circumstances.

Disposition

Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered that the complaint be dismissed with leave to amend. Johnson was given 28 days from the filing of the order to submit an amended complaint on the court’s form, using the case caption and number and labeling the document “AMENDED COMPLAINT.” The court explained that the amended complaint would replace the original and that claims or defendants omitted from it would no longer be part of the case. The court warned that failure to file a timely amended complaint in accordance with the order would result in dismissal of the action with prejudice for failure to state a claim, without further notice. The court separately denied the motion for appointment of counsel.