Mitchell v. Thomas et al

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 9/28/2012. (KAM, )

FILED
2012 Sep-28 PM 12:13
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
JASPER DIVISION
JERMAINE MITCHELL,
Plaintiff ,
v.
COMMISSIONER KIM THOMAS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE No. 6:11-CV-4105-SLB-JEO

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on February 28, 2012,
recommending that this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. On March 23, 2012, the
plaintiff filed another amended complaint as his objections to the report and recommendation.
In this amended complaint (doc. 10), the plaintiff attempts to enhance his claims by claiming
that the actions of the defendants are discriminatory and he has been injured by their actions. The
plaintiff has still not explained how his constitutional rights have been violated, or who is
responsible for violating them except for Governor Bentley.
The plaintiff continues to complain that he is being subjected to cruel and unusual
punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment by the defendants who have intentionally created
overcrowded prisons. The plaintiff complains that Governor Bentley is awarding good time credit
to non-violent habitual offenders with sentences of fewer than fifteen years, in violation of the state
statute which provides that habitual offenders are not eligible to receive good time credit. According
to the plaintiff, this practice is discriminatory and is causing the prisons to be overcrowded. The

plaintiff goes on to claim that the overcrowded conditions have caused him to be exposed to
tuberculosis and quarantined, have reduced the portions of food served, caused a change in the food
served, and have reduced the rehabilitation services for inmates with disabilities. The plaintiff also
alleges a correlation between the overcrowding and the guards using excessive force. The plaintiff
claims that he has “been beat [sic], abused physically, mentally attacked, and [given] several false
disciplinary [sic] by one specific officer and one specific shift.” (Doc. 10, p.6) The plaintiff’s vague
and conclusory allegations do not state a claim for which relief can be granted.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including
the report and recommendation, and the plaintiff’s response in the form of an amended complaint,
the Court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge's report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED
and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. Accordingly, the complaint is due to be dismissed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. A
Final Judgment will be entered.
DONE, this 28th day of September, 2012.

SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2