Aguilar v. Napa County Board of Supervisors

Background

Edgar Aguilar, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint concerns events at a jail where Aguilar was temporarily housed in the custody of the Napa County Department of Corrections before his transfer to a state prison. His request to proceed without paying the filing fee was left for decision in a separate order.

The dispute concerns the confiscation of a hardcover book, Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage, sent to Aguilar by his wife on July 9, 2023. The book was confiscated under the Department of Corrections’ policy excluding hardcover and used books. According to the different responses to Aguilar’s grievance, the book was placed in his property bag under that policy and was available to be released to a loved one.

Claims and Screening

Aguilar alleged that the categorical ban on hardcover and used books violated his First Amendment right to free speech. He also alleged that excluding and disposing of the book without an opportunity to challenge the exclusion violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. He sought damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief.

The court conducted the required screening of a prisoner’s complaint against a governmental entity or its officers or employees. At this stage, the court must identify claims that can proceed and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court liberally construed Aguilar’s complaint because he was representing himself.

The court stated that Aguilar had alleged cognizable First and Fourteenth Amendment claims based on the confiscation of his book under the Department of Corrections’ policy. For the free-speech claim, the court cited the rule that a prison regulation affecting a prisoner’s speech must be reasonably related to legitimate prison interests. For the due-process claim, the court cited the requirement of an opportunity for a hearing at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.

Order

The court ordered the Clerk to send the lawsuit and service-waiver materials to the Napa County Board of Supervisors, Director Dina Jose, Assistant Director A.J. Alarcon, Lt. Paul R. Fernandez, Sgt. G. Valesi, and R. Norris at the Napa County Department of Corrections. The Clerk also was directed to send courtesy copies to the Office of the County Counsel for Napa County and a copy of the order to Aguilar.

The defendants were directed to file their consent or declination to magistrate-judge jurisdiction within 28 days after the form was sent. Within 91 days after the order was filed, they were directed to file a summary-judgment motion or another dispositive motion addressing the claims found cognizable. The order also set deadlines for Aguilar’s opposition and explained procedures concerning service, discovery, communications with the court, and extensions of time.

This was an initial screening and service order. It did not make a final decision on whether the alleged First or Fourteenth Amendment violations occurred or whether Aguilar would prevail.