Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 1 of 4

Transcription

1 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 1 of 4 1 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General ofthe State ofcalifornia 2 DAVID S. CHANEY ChiefAssistant Attorney General 3 ROCHELLE C. EAST Acting Senior Assistant Attorney General 4 JONATHAN L. WOLFF Supervising Deputy Attorney General 5 SCOTT J. FEUDALE, State Bar No Deputy Attorney General Golden Gate Avenue, Suite San Francisco, CA Telephone: (415) Fax: (415) Scott.Feudale@doj.ca.gov 9 Attorneys for Defendants Wheeler, Lucarelli, and Trujillo IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION KEVIN ROBY, v. T. STEWART, et ai., Plaintiff, Defendants. Case No. C JF (PR) DECLARATION OF C. WILBER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS 20 I, C. Wilber, declare as follows: I am employed by the California Department ofcorrections and Rehabilitation 22 (CDCR) as a Correctional Counselor II Supervisor and serve as the Inmate Appeals Coordinator 23 at Pelican Bay State Prison in Crescent City, California. I have been employed in this position 24 since October As the Inmate Appeals Coordinator, my responsibilities include receiving, 25 screening, logging, routing, and assigning administrative appeals that are submitted by inmates. 26 My duties also include monitoring the dispositions ofthese inmate appeals. I am competent to 27 testify to the matters set forth in this declaration, and ifcalled upon to do so, would and could so 28 testify. I submit this declaration in support ofdefendants' motion to dismiss. Dec!. of C. Wilber Supp. Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss 1 Roby v. Stewart, et al. Case No. C JF (PR)

2 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 2 of In accordance with Title 15 ofthe California Code ofregulations, section , an 2 inmate must submit an inmate appeal within 15 working days ofthe event or the decision being 3 appealed, or ofreceiving an unacceptable lower level appeal decision. An appeal may be 4 rejected ifthe time limits for submitting are exceeded. Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, (c)(6). 5 There are four levels ofreview: (1) informal resolution, (2) first formal level ofreview, (3) 6 second formal level review by the institutional head or designee, (4) and third formal level 7 review by a designated representative ofthe director under supervision ofthe chief, inmate 8 appeals. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, All ofthe formal appeals submitted by inmates at Pelican Bay and accepted for review 10 at the First and Second Level ofreview at the institution are tracked in a computerized system. 11 The tracking system contains the following information: the name and CDCR identification 12 number ofthe inmate submitting the appeal, the log number ofthe appeal, date received, appeal 13 issue, level ofreview, date completed at each level ofreview, and decision reached At the request ofthe Attorney General's Office, a computerized search ofthe 15 institutional appeals database was conducted for inmate appeals submitted by inmate Kevin 16 Roby, CDCR No. D-93298, which were reviewed at Pelican Bay at the First and Second Level of 17 Review Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy ofthe computer print-out ofthe results 19 ofthat search.! As the record indicates, inmate Roby submitted eleven appeals at Pelican Bay between 21 August 25,2005, the date ofthe alleged in~ident in inmate Roby's Complaint, and February 25, the date inmate Roby filed this action. These appeals are: a. Appeal Log No. PBSP-B This appeal, which related to a programming issue involving the reusability of a canteen bag, was received at the first level on February 10, 2006 and was granted on March 9, b. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which related to Plaintiff disputing a prison disciplinary proceeding, was received at the second level on October 26,2006 and was denied on December 12, The informal and first formal levels Decl, ofc. Wilber Supp. Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss 2 Roby v. Stewart, et al. Case No. C JF (PR)

3 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 3 of ofreview were bypassed on this appeal. c. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which related to a disallowed item ofmail, was received at the first level on December 11, 2000 and was granted on January 10, d. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which grieved the presentation of Plaintiffs morning meal, was received at the first level on December 19, 2006 and was withdrawn on January 10, e. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which related to withholding Plaintiffs personal property pending a criminal investigation, was received at the second level on March 5, 2007 and was withdrawn on April 13, The informal and first formal levels ofreview were bypassed on this appeal. f. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which grieved Plaintiffs extended term in the Security Housing Unit, was received at the first level on May 17, 2007 and withdrawn on June 5, This appeal was then received at the second level on June 11,2007 and denied on June 27,2007. g. Appeal Log No. PBSP-B This appeal, which related to Plaintiffs access to the prison's law library, was completelyexhausted at the Director's level and denied on December 9, h. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which related to a disputed balance in Plaintiffs trust account, was received at the first level on October 22, 2007 and denied on December 19, i. Appeal Log No. PBSP-P This appeal, which related to a disallowed map sent to Plaintiffin the mail, was received at the first level on November 8, 2007 and granted in part on December 27, This appeal was previously heard and denied at the informal level on November 6, j. Appeal Log No. PBSP-A This appeal, which related to a living conditions issue concerning a frosted cell window in the administrative segregation unit, was received at the first level on January 7, 2008 and granted in part on January Dec!. ofc. Wilber Supp. Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss 3 Roby v. Stewart, et al. Case No. C JF (PR)

4 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 4 of 4 ~ 17, k, Appeal Log No. PBSP-A This appeal, which related to an identification card that was not issued, was received at the first level February 14, 2008 and 4 withdrawn on February 21, As is demonstrated above, none ofthe appeals submitted between August 25, 200S'and 6 February 25, 2008 concern the allegations contained in Plaintiffs complaint, specifically, how 7 his double-cell status interfered with his right to practice his religion and/or threatened his safety. 8 I declare underpenalty ofperjury that the forgoing is true and correct to the best of-my 9 knowledge. Executed at Crescent City, Califo~a, on July J..8., ( \ t\ / ""'-'--, ~ C.'W-i-Hrel- 13 Correctional Counselor Il, Supervisor Inmate Appeals Coordinator WilberDecl.wpd Decl, of C. Wilber Supp. Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss 4 Roby v. Stewart, at al. Case No. C IF (PR)

5 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13-2 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 1 of 4

6 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13-2 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 2 of 4

7 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13-2 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 3 of 4

8 Case 5:08-cv JF Document 13-2 Filed 07/31/2008 Page 4 of 4