White v. McKee et al
Filing
11
OPINION AND ORDER OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL. If Plaintiff elects to appeal this decision, he may not proceed without prepayment of the fees and costs on appeal because an appeal would be frivolous and could not be taken in good faith. Signed by District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds. (JCur)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
SEAN DARNEL WHITE, #353512,
Case Number: 2:13-CV-13254
Plaintiff,
HONORABLE NANCY G. EDMUNDS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
v.
KENNETH MCKEE, ET AL.,
Defendants.
/
OPINION AND ORDER OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL
This matter is pending before the Court on a pro se civil rights complaint filed by
Sean Darnell White (“Plaintiff”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is currently
incarcerated at the Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan. Plaintiff
names nine defendants: Michigan State Police Sergeant Jacquelyn Stasiak, the County of
Ionia, and the following Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility employees: Kenneth McKee
(warden), Doug Welton (inspector), Matt McCauley (deputy warden), Robert Mote
(resident unit manager), and David Angel (officer).
Plaintiff’s claims stem from his placement in administrative segregation. He was
placed in administrative segregation because he was the subject of a Michigan State
Police investigation into a suspected prison drug smuggling ring. Plaintiff seeks
monetary and injunctive relief.
I. Standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that a complaint set forth “a short
and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” as well as
“a demand for the relief sought.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), (3). The purpose of this rule is
to “give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it
rests.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson,
355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)). While this notice pleading standard
does not require “detailed” factual allegations, Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, it does require
more than the bare assertion of legal conclusions or “an unadorned, thedefendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009). “A pleading that offers ‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action will not do.’” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).
“Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of ‘further factual
enhancement.’” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557).
Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee for
this action. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), the Court is required to
sua sponte dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint before service on a defendant if it
determines that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such
relief. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Similarly, the Court is
required to dismiss a complaint seeking redress against government entities, officers, and
2
employees that it finds to be frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from
such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). A complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable
basis in law or in fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).
To state a federal civil rights claim, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) he was
deprived of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the federal Constitution or laws of
the United States, and (2) the deprivation was caused by a person acting under color of
state law. Flagg Bros. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149, 155-57 (1978). A pro se civil rights
complaint is to be construed liberally. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972).
II. Discussion
Plaintiff raises five claims for relief in his complaint, all of which relate to his
placement in administrative segregation. Michigan State Police were investigating
Plaintiff and several other prisoners regarding their involvement in a prison drug
smuggling ring. Michigan Department of Corrections’ Police Directive 04.05.120.L.4
provides that a prisoner who is under investigation by an outside authority for suspected
felonious behavior may be placed in administrative segregation.
The Sixth Circuit has repeatedly found that confinement to segregation does not
present an “atypical and significant” hardship implicating a protected liberty interest. See
Jones v. Baker, 155 F.3d 810, 812-13 (6th Cir. 1998) (two years of segregation while
inmate was investigated for murder of prison guard in riot); Mackey v. Dyke, 111 F.3d
460, 463 (6th Cir. 1997) (one year of segregation after inmate was found guilty of
3
possession of illegal contraband and assault and where reclassification was delayed due to
prison crowding did not implicate a protected liberty interest); Rimmer-Bey v. Brown, 62
F.3d 789, 790-91 (6th Cir. 1995) (placement of inmate serving life sentence in
administrative segregation after he served thirty days of detention for a misconduct
conviction did not impose an “atypical and significant hardship”). Plaintiff has not
identified any significant and atypical deprivation arising from his confinement in
administrative segregation. Plaintiff thus fails to state a claim for relief under § 1983.
III. Conclusion
For the reasons stated, the Court concludes that the complaint fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that if Plaintiff elects to appeal this decision, he
may not proceed without prepayment of the fees and costs on appeal because an appeal
would be frivolous and could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3);
Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962).
S/Nancy G. Edmunds
Nancy G. Edmunds
United States District Judge
Dated: December 12, 2013
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on
December 12, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
S/Johnetta M. Curry-Williams
Case Manager
Acting in the Absence of Carol A. Hemeyer
4
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?