(PC) Carrasco v. Cababe ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD CARRASCO, Case No. 1:19-cv-00724-NONE-JDP 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TELEPHONE ACCESS TO 13 v. CONFER WITH HIS ATTORNEYS 14 JOHNNY CABABE, et al., ECF No. 42 15 Defendants. ORDER THAT THE CLERK OF COURT SERVE A COPY OF THIS ORDER ON THE 16 LITIGATION COORDINATOR AT PLAINTIFF’S FACILITY 17 18 19 Plaintiff, a state prisoner with counsel, has moved for a court order giving him access to 20 two confidential phone calls with his attorneys, the first scheduled to occur on October 14, 2020, 21 at 1:00 p.m. and the second on October 28, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. ECF No. 42. In the court’s 22 experience, it is typically not necessary to issue a writ for telephonic conferences between 23 lawyers and their clients. This is because “prisoners have a Sixth Amendment right to confer 24 privately with counsel,” Mangiaracina v. Penzone, 849 F.3d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 2017), and “a 25 First Amendment right to telephone access,” Keenan v. Hall, 83 F.3d 1083, 1092 (9th Cir. 1996). 26 Because plaintiff has the right to meet confidentially and by telephone with his counsel, a 27 court order should not be necessary to facilitate such a meeting. To the extent that the prison 28 needs confirmation that plaintiff is engaged in active litigation, this order confirms that it is the wOAOe UV ETN INE VR MMO St OPO ee Oy ove 1 | case. The clerk of court shall serve a copy of this order on the litigation coordinator at California 2 | State Prison, Los Angeles County. The court believes that the litigation coordinator should be 3 | able to facilitate the conversations in question. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. ° p : —N prssann — Dated: _ September 28, 2020 7 UNI STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 | No. 205. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28