Todd v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Michael Anthony Todd appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that he has been denied the right to practice his religion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir.2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
The district court properly dismissed Todd’s due process claim because Todd had an adequate…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Wilhelm v. RotmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Donald Robin BARREN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tom HARRINGTON, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Lee Max Barnett v. Helen Centoni, Correctional Officer, San Quentin State Prison S. Donahue, Correctional Officer, San Quentin State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Ramirez v. GalazaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- (PC) Martin v. AllisonDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
- (PC) Quair v. CDCR HQDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
- (PC) Turner v. MunozDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
- (PC) Turner v. MunozDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019
- Acuna v. PollardDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2022
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.