Wilkins v. Smith CA5

Filed 5/25/23 Wilkins v. Smith CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

KEENAN WILKINS, F082992 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. BCV-20-100136) v.

K. SMITH, et al., OPINION Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. David R. Lampe, Judge. Keenan Wilkins, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Monica N. Anderson, Assistant Attorney General, Alicia A. Bower, David C. Goodwin, Misha D. Igra, and George R. Morris, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Respondent. -ooOoo- Keenan Wilkins, a California state prisoner, sued several prison officials after he claimed they subjected him to a “degrading/humiliating/unreasonable”1 search.

Wilkins’s filings are handwritten. We take slight liberty to correct capitalization 1 and punctuation while quoting his writing throughout this opinion.

Ultimately, the defendants, represented by the Attorney General, moved to declare Wilkins a vexatious litigant and to require him to furnish security to proceed with the lawsuit. (Code Civ. Proc.,2 §§ 391.1 & 391.3.) The trial court granted the defendants’ motion in its entirety and, after Wilkins failed to post security, dismissed the case. (See § 391.4 [dismissal remedy].) Wilkins appeals, raising a variety of issues detailed below. We affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND While in prison, Wilkins was searched by prison officials. He described the search as a “degrading/humiliating/unreasonable act in the ‘nude’ in front of so many people --- including ‘women’.”3 He added that he was “coerced” and “threaten[ed]” into compliance, otherwise “he would not get” to his “destination” at “California Health Care Facility.” Amended Complaint4 Wilkins filed an amended complaint on August 19, 2020.5 He alleged several causes of action including First, Fourth, and Eighth Amendment violations, privacy invasion (Civ. Code, § 43), interference with constitutional rights (Civ. Code, § 52.1), intentionally inflicting emotional distress, and mental anguish. The complaint sought injunctive relief and unspecified “compensatory” and “punitive” damages.