Beene v. Perry et al

Filing 14

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS 3 11 13 . Signed by Judge James D. Todd on 9/27/16. (Todd, James)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN DIVISION
CRAIG LAMONT BEENE,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GRADY PERRY, ET AL.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 15-1291-JDT-egb

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS

The pro se prisoner Plaintiff, Craig Lamont Beene, who is currently incarcerated at
the Turney Center Industrial Complex in Only, Tennessee, filed a complaint pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) The complaint concerns Plaintiff’s previous confinement at
the Hardeman County Correctional Facility (“HCCF”) in Whiteville, Tennessee. The case
is currently undergoing screening in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and
1915A(b).
The complaint was accompanied by a motion for temporary restraining order and
preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff requests that the Tennessee Department of
Correction and Corrections Corporation of America, which operates the HCCF, be enjoined
from harrassing him, segregating him without due process, impeding his access to the courts,
retaliating against him for exercising his First Amendment right to redress of grievances, or

transferring him to a prison with less access to legal research, including computer access.
(Id.)
The motion for injunctive relief is DENIED.

Because Plaintiff is no longer

incarcerated at the HCCF, his request for protection is moot. Cf. Moore v. Curtis, 68 F.
App’x 561, 562 (6th Cir. 2003) (claims for declaratory and injunctive relief against prison
staff moot when inmate transferred to another facility); Kensu v. Haigh, 87 F.3d 172, 175
(6th Cir. 1996) (same); Tramber v. Pleasant, No. 4:12CV-P31-M, 2012 WL 4594339, at *5
(W.D. Ky. Oct. 2, 2012) (inmate’s claim for a transfer and medical care moot when he was
transferred to another facility).
The docket reflects that Plaintiff was transferred from the HCCF to the Wayne County
Annex of the Turney Center Industrial Complex (“TCIX”) in Clifton, Tennessee (ECF No.
10), and from there to the main site of the TCIX in Only, Tennessee (ECF No. 13-2). Any
federal claims regarding conditions at either of those facilities should be brought in the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.
On February 1, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend his complaint. Pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Plaintiff may amend his complaint once as a matter
of course. Therefore, although leave of Court is technically unnecessary, the motion to
amend is GRANTED. The amended complaint will be screened along with the original
complaint.
Plaintiff filed a motion on August 22, 2016, seeking various relief. He first asks for
the status of the case. As indicated, the case is still undergoing screening, and no process
2

will issue unless and until the Court orders service. Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for the
Clerk to submit a service package is DENIED.
Plaintiff also requests a complete copy of the file in this case, stating that TDOC
employees have refused to make him copies and that most of the documents he submitted to
the Court were originals. That request is also DENIED. The docket in this case is
approximately 90 pages, and Plaintiff’s indigent status does not entitle him to free copies.
Plaintiff may obtain copies from the Clerk at a cost of 50 cents per page. He should specify
which documents he wants, and the Clerk will advise him of the number of pages and the
total cost. The Clerk is directed to provide Plaintiff with another copy of the docket sheet.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ James D. Todd
JAMES D. TODD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3