Hicks v. Pixley et al

Filing 80

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Claude M. Hilton on 9/20/2019. (See order for further details).(acha, )Copy sent as directed in the order.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Alexandria Division

Deonta Jerome Hicks
Plaintiff,

V.

Wendall W.Pixley,^
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)

I:16cvl89(CMH/IDD)

)
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Deonta Jerome Hicks, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro

has filed a civil rights action

alleging violations of his religious rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized
Persons Act(RLUIPA),s^ 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-2, and the First Amendment,s^42 U.S.C, §
1983. The defendants filed a Second Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment, supported by a

legal memorandum in which they incorporate by reference a previously filed supporting affidavit
with exhibits (entitled "enclosures").[Dkt. Nos. 47-1,71-72]. Plaintiff received the notice

required by Local Rule 7(K)and Roseboro v. Garrison. 528 F.2d 309(4th Cir. 1975).[Dkt. No.

73]. Plaintiff filed a response, supported by an affidavit, opposing the defendants' motion.[Dkt.
Nos. 77-78]. This matter is therefore ripe for adjudication. For the reasons stated below,the
defendants' Second Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted as to both First
Amendment claims and to the RLUIPA claim contained in Count 6 of plaintiffs Amended

Complaint[Dkt. No. 10], the remainder of plaintiffs RLUIPA claims will be dismissed as moot,
and this action will be dismissed.

When Hicks filed this lawsuit, he was incarcerated at Sussex 11 State Prison(SUSP).

Although he has since transferred facilities, all of his claims stem from activities that occurred
while incarcerated at SUSP. He brings six claims under RLUIPA. He alleges that(1) he could