Collins Bey, Robert et al v. Hamblin, Gary et al

Filing 23

ORDER that plaintiff Robert L. Collins Bey's motion for reconsideration, Dkt. 21 , is DENIED. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 01/30/2019. (rks),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ROBERT L. COLLINS BEY,
Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

TONEY ASHWORTH, CAPTAIN TRATTELS,
TIM DOUMA, and MICHAEL MEISNER,

17-cv-784-jdp

Defendants.
Plaintiff Robert L. Collins Bey, appearing pro se, is an inmate at the Wisconsin Secure
Program Facility. He alleges that prison officials violated his constitutional right to due process
in a conduct-report proceeding that led to him being placed in segregation for a year.
I screened Collins Bey’s complaint and dismissed most of his due process claims because
the Due Process Clause requires only that he receive “‘informal, nonadversarial due process.’”
Dkt. 14, at 2–3 (quoting Westefer v. Neal, 682 F.3d 679, 684 (7th Cir. 2012)). Most of the
alleged deficiencies in his disciplinary proceedings, such as false evidence being used against
him, his advocate’s failure to assist him, or his inability to call witnesses, are not issues that
could support due process claims. I allowed him to proceed on claims against Toney Ashworth
and Captain Trattels for failing to act as neutral decisionmakers. Id. at 3–4. I later granted
Collins Bey’s motion for reconsideration in part, reversing my previous decision to dismiss his
claims against defendants Tim Douma and Michael Meisner, who reviewed the disciplinary
committee’s decision. See Dkt. 16. I concluded that he could bring due process claims against
Douma and Meisner for failing to intervene after being alerted about Ashworth and Trattels’s
bias. Id. at 2–3.

Now Collins Bey has filed another motion for reconsideration, seeking reinstatement of
due process, equal protection, and Eighth Amendment claims that he originally attempted to
bring. Dkt. 21. But I will deny it because nothing in the motion persuades me that there are
more claims that Collins Bey may bring in this case. Most importantly, I again conclude that
Collins Bey’s claims belong under the Due Process Clause, and because he is challenging a
disciplinary determination that does not involve the loss of good-time credits, he is entitled to
only the informal due process rights discussed in Westefer and my previous orders.
Collins Bey says that I have held him to too stringent of a pleading standard and that
he needs to submit an amended complaint. He is incorrect that I have applied the wrong
pleading standard. He is free to file an amended complaint, which I will then screen under the
Prison Litigation Reform Act and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to determine whether
his amendment is appropriate and whether he states new claims for relief.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Robert L. Collins Bey’s motion for reconsideration,
Dkt. 21, is DENIED.
Entered January 30, 2019.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

2