Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

Nick Mangiaracina v. Paul Penzone

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 3, 2017No. 14-15271Published

1Concurring in the judgmentBybee, Circuit Judge

I concur in the conclusion in Part III.A of the majority opinion, that prisoners have a general Sixth Amendment right to be present when legal mail related to a *1199criminal matter is inspected. I write separately because I don’t think the majority has explained with sufficient clarity what is required to state a Sixth Amendment claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. I am deeply concerned that the majority opinion’s characterization of Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2014), and out-of-circuit cases which dealt with either intentional acts or pattern-and-practice allegations, Maj. Op. at 1195-96,…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Henry Lavado, Jr. v. Patrick W. KeohaneCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
  3. Gallagher v. SheltonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
  4. Davis v. GoordCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
  5. George Parrish and Charles Giles v. Perry Johnson, Charles Anderson, K.L. Cole, and Clarence TurnerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1986

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API