Carter v. Shelton et al

Filing 13

ORDER OF SERVICE. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 6/26/18. (Certificate of Service Attached). (kcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2018)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

MICHAEL ANTHONY CARTER,
Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Case No. 18-cv-02035-PJH
ORDER OF SERVICE

v.
RALPH R. SHELTON, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14
15

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §
1983. He has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
DISCUSSION

16
17

STANDARD OF REVIEW

18

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners

19

seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

20

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review the court must identify any cognizable claims, and

21

dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief

22

may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such

23

relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v.

24

Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

25

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement

26

of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." "Specific facts are not

27

necessary; the statement need only '"give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . . claim

28

is and the grounds upon which it rests."'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007)

(citations omitted). Although in order to state a claim a complaint “does not need detailed

2

factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds’ of his 'entitle[ment]

3

to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the

4

elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to

5

raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550

6

U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state

7

a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 570. The United States Supreme

8

Court has recently explained the “plausible on its face” standard of Twombly: “While legal

9

conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual

10

allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.”

12

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).

13

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential

14

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was

15

violated, and (2) that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the

16

color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

17

LEGAL CLAIMS

18

Plaintiff alleges that defendants falsely labeled him as a sex offender which led to

19
20

his assault by other inmates.
The Eighth Amendment requires that prison officials take reasonable measures to

21

guarantee the safety of prisoners. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832 (1994). In

22

particular, prison officials have a duty to protect prisoners from violence at the hands of

23

other prisoners. Id. at 833; Cortez v. Skol, 776 F. 3d 1046, 1050 (9th Cir. 2015); Hearns

24

v. Terhune, 413 F.3d 1036, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005). The failure of prison officials to protect

25

inmates from attacks by other inmates or from dangerous conditions at the prison violates

26

the Eighth Amendment when two requirements are met: (1) the deprivation alleged is,

27

objectively, sufficiently serious; and (2) the prison official is, subjectively, deliberately

28

indifferent to inmate health or safety. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834. A prison official is
2

1

deliberately indifferent if he knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or

2

safety by failing to take reasonable steps to abate it. Id. at 837.

3

Allegations in a pro se complaint sufficient to raise an inference that the named

4

prison officials knew that plaintiff faced a substantial risk of serious harm and disregarded

5

that risk by failing to take reasonable measures to abate it state a failure-to-protect claim.

6

See Hearns, 413 F.3d at 1041-42 (citing Farmer, 511 U.S. at 847).

7

Regardless of mandatory regulatory language, the classification of an inmate as a

8

sex offender may be the type of atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation

9

to the ordinary incidents of prison life that the Supreme Court held created a protected
liberty interest in Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). See Neal, 131 F.3d 818, 827-

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

30 (9th Cir. 1997). While such a liberty interest is not created merely by the requirement

12

that sex offenders participate in a specified treatment program, see id. at 830, in Neal the

13

Ninth Circuit found that "the stigmatizing consequences of the attachment of the 'sex

14

offender' label coupled with the subjection of the targeted inmate to a mandatory

15

treatment program whose successful completion is a precondition for parole eligibility

16

create the kind of deprivations of liberty that require procedural protections," id. Under

17

these circumstances, inmates are entitled to procedural due process before being

18

classified as sex offenders. See id. at 830-31 (inmates entitled to procedural protections

19

of Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (1974), including notice of reasons for classification

20

as sex offender and a hearing at which the inmate may call witnesses and present

21

documentary evidence in his defense). An inmate who has been convicted of a sex

22

crime in a prior adversarial setting, whether as the result of a bench trial, jury trial, or plea

23

agreement, has received the minimum protections of due process. See id. at 831.

24

Plaintiff was found guilty of a rules violation for indecent exposure. As a result he

25

was placed in restrictive housing, had to wear an indecent exposure suit, and a sign was

26

paced on his cell regarding the indecent exposure. A different inmate was later assaulted

27

because he had an indecent exposure sign on his cell. Several weeks later plaintiff was

28

assaulted by the same inmates how had assaulted the other inmate with a sign on his
3

1

cell. Plaintiff suffered injuries as a result of the incident. Plaintiff has presented a

2

cognizable claim for failure to protect under the Eighth Amendment and related state law.

3

While it is not clear if plaintiff was classified as a sex offender as opposed to just having a

4

sign on his cell indicating he was guilty of indecent exposure, liberally construed he also

5

presents a due process violation.1
CONCLUSION

6

1. The clerk shall issue a summons and the United States Marshal shall serve,

7
8

without prepayment of fees, copies of the complaint with attachments and copies of this

9

order on the following defendants at San Quentin State Prison: Correctional Lieutenant
Ralph R. Shelton and Correctional Officer Fitsimmons. All other defendants are

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

dismissed with prejudice from this action.
2. In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the court orders as follows:

12

a. No later than sixty days from the date of service, defendants shall file a

13
14

motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion. The motion shall be supported

15

by adequate factual documentation and shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of

16

Civil Procedure 56, and shall include as exhibits all records and incident reports

17

stemming from the events at issue. If defendant is of the opinion that this case cannot be

18

resolved by summary judgment, she shall so inform the court prior to the date her

19

summary judgment motion is due. All papers filed with the court shall be promptly served

20

on the plaintiff.

21

b. At the time the dispositive motion is served, defendants shall also serve,

22

on a separate paper, the appropriate notice or notices required by Rand v. Rowland, 154

23

F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc), and Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120

24

n. 4 (9th Cir. 2003). See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940-941 (9th Cir. 2012) (Rand

25

and Wyatt notices must be given at the time motion for summary judgment or motion to

26
1

27
28

Plaintiff also names the prison as a defendant. Plaintiff cannot bring his claim against
the prison pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. Nor can plaintiff bring this claim
pursuant to Monell v. Dep't of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978), because the
prison is not a local municipality. This defendant is dismissed.
4

1

dismiss for nonexhaustion is filed, not earlier); Rand at 960 (separate paper requirement).
c. Plaintiff's opposition to the dispositive motion, if any, shall be filed with

2
3

the court and served upon defendants no later than thirty days from the date the motion

4

was served upon him. Plaintiff must read the attached page headed "NOTICE --

5

WARNING," which is provided to him pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-

6

954 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc), and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411-12 (9th Cir.

7

1988).

8
9

If defendants file a motion for summary judgment claiming that plaintiff failed to
exhaust his available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a),
plaintiff should take note of the attached page headed "NOTICE -- WARNING

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

(EXHAUSTION)," which is provided to him as required by Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d

12

1108, 1120 n. 4 (9th Cir. 2003).

13
14
15
16
17

d. If defendant wishes to file a reply brief, he shall do so no later than
fifteen days after the opposition is served upon her.
e. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief is
due. No hearing will be held on the motion unless the court so orders at a later date.
3. All communications by plaintiff with the court must be served on defendant, or

18

defendant’s counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the

19

document to defendants or defendants' counsel.

20

4. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil

21

Procedure. No further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) is

22

required before the parties may conduct discovery.

23

5. It is plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must keep the court

24

informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the clerk headed

25

“Notice of Change of Address.” He also must comply with the court's orders in a timely

26
27
28
5

1

fas
shion. Failu to do so may resul in the dism
ure
o
lt
missal of th action fo failure to prosecute
his
or

2

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Pr
e
rocedure 41
1(b).

3
4

S
RED.
IT IS SO ORDER
Da
ated: June 26, 2018
2

5
6
PH
HYLLIS J. H
HAMILTON
N
Un
nited States District Ju
s
udge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6

1
2

NOTICE -- WARNING (SUMMARY JUDGMENT)
If defendants move for summary judgment, they are seeking to have your case

3

dismissed. A motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil

4

Procedure will, if granted, end your case.

5

Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary

6

judgment. Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue

7

of material fact--that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the

8

result of your case, the party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as

9

a matter of law, which will end your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion
for summary judgment that is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your complaint says. Instead, you must set

12

out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or authenticated

13

documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts shown in the defendant’s

14

declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of material fact for

15

trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment, if

16

appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will

17

be dismissed and there will be no trial.

18
19
20
21

NOTICE -- WARNING (EXHAUSTION)
If defendants file a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust, they are
seeking to have your case dismissed. If the motion is granted it will end your case.
You have the right to present any evidence you may have which tends to show

22

that you did exhaust your administrative remedies. Such evidence may be in the form of

23

declarations (statements signed under penalty of perjury) or authenticated documents,

24

that is, documents accompanied by a declaration showing where they came from and

25
why they are authentic, or other sworn papers, such as answers to interrogatories or
26
27
28

depositions. If defendants file a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust and it
is granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.
7

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES D
D
DISTRICT C
COURT

5

NORTHER DISTRIC OF CALI
RN
CT
IFORNIA

6
7

MICHAEL ANTHONY CARTER,
M
A
C

Case No.18
8-cv-02035-PJH

Plaintiff,
8
v.

CERTIFIC
CATE OF S
SERVICE

9
10

RALPH R. SH
HELTON, et al.,
t
Defendants
s.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16

I, the un
ndersigned, hereby certify that I am an employe in the Offi of the Clerk, U.S.
ee
ice
Dis
strict Court, Northern Di
istrict of Cal
lifornia.
That on 6/26/2018, I SERVED a true and c
n
correct copy(
(ies) of the a
attached, by p
placing said
cop
py(ies) in a postage paid envelope ad
p
d
ddressed to t person(s) hereinafter listed, by d
the
)
r
depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said c
i
M
copy(ies) int an inter-office deliver receptacle
to
ry
e
cated in the Clerk's office
C
e.
loc

17
18
19

el
C
-50181
Michae Anthony Carter ID: CDuel Vocational Institution D-2
239
PO Box 600
x
Tracy, CA 94579
C

20
21
22
23
24

ated: 6/26/20
018
Da
Su
usan Y. Soon
ng
Cl
lerk, United States Distr Court
d
rict

25
26
27
28

By
y:_________
___________
_______
K
Kelly Collins, Deputy Cle to the
,
erk
H
Honorable PH
HYLLIS J. H
HAMILTON
N