Chatman v. Roy et al
Filing
32
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 1/27/2020. (JLC)
FILED
2020 Jan-27 PM 05:05
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STANLEY BRENT CHATMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
COI KENNEDY D. ROY, et al,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action Number
2:17-cv-01952-AKK
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter came before the court today for a bench trial on Stanley
Chatman’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claims based his allegations that
Officer Kennedy Roy sprayed Chatman in the face with a fire extinguisher and
Lieutenant Mohammad Jenkins assaulted Chatman in a hallway by spraying him
with a chemical agent and slapping him. Chatman testified in support of his case and
presented inmates Mornterieus Densmore, Travis Burns, and Johnny Davis as
witnesses. The two defendants testified and also called as a witness Joshua
Murphree, who was a corrections lieutenant at the time of the incident.
As explained in open court, based on Officer Roy and Lt. Jenkins’ testimony
and their demeanor, and that of the other witnesses, the court finds Officer Roy and
Lt. Jenkins more credible than Chatman and his witnesses. The court, sitting as the
trier of fact and law, concludes by a preponderance of the evidence that Chatman
has failed to establish that these defendants violated his Eight Amendment right to
be free from excessive force. Therefore, in light of the evidence presented by the
defendants and Chatman’s failure to prove his claims, the court will enter judgment
in favor of Defendants Kennedy Roy and Mohammed Jenkins and dismiss this case
with prejudice. A separate order in accordance with this memorandum opinion will
be entered.
DONE the 27th day of January, 2020.
_________________________________
ABDUL K. KALLON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?