(PC) Talamantes v. Merced County Jail

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: April 28, 2021
• Docket: 1:20-cv-01643
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 JEFFREY TALAMANTES, 1:20-cv-01643-DAD-GSA-PC

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR COURT TO PROVIDE 13 vs. INFORMATION (ECF No. 8.) 14 MERCED COUNTY JAIL, et al.,

15 Defendants.

18 19 20 Jeffrey Talamantes (“Plaintiff”) is a jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 21 in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 22 On April 26, 2021, Plaintiff filed a request for the court to inform him about his rights to 23 protect himself, how to obtain copies from the Merced County Jail, and how to obtain witness 24 statements. Plaintiff is advised that it is not the court’s duty to act as Plaintiff’s counsel or 25 paralegal in these matters. Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist., 528 U.S. 26 152, 162, 120 S.Ct. 684, 145 L.Ed.2d 597 (2000) (“[T]he trial judge is under no duty to provide 27 personal instruction on courtroom procedure or to perform any legal ‘chores’ for the defendant 28 that counsel would normally carry out”); Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 231, 124 S. Ct. 2441, 1 2446, 159 L. Ed. 2d 338 (2004) (“Requiring district courts to advise a pro se litigant in such a 2 manner would undermine district judges’ role as impartial decisionmakers.”). 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for court to provide 4 information, filed on April 26, 2021, is DENIED. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Dated: April 28, 2021 /s/ Gary S. Austin 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28