Gawlik v. Semple
| Decision Date | 28 April 2020 |
| Docket Number | AC 42550 |
| Citation | 197 Conn.App. 83,231 A.3d 326 |
| Parties | Jan GAWLIK v. Scott SEMPLE et al. |
| Court | Connecticut Court of Appeals |
Jan Gawlik, self-represented, the appellant (plaintiff).
Steven R. Strom, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, was William Tong, attorney general, for the appellees (defendants).
Elgo, Devlin and Sheldon, Js.
The self-represented, incarcerated plaintiff, Jan Gawlik, brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief against present and former employees of the Department of Correction (department)—namely, former Commissioner of Correction Scott Semple, District Administrator Angel Quiros, Warden Scott Erfe, and Simone Wislocki, a mail handler at the Cheshire Correctional Institution (Cheshire)—in their official capacities. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants had wrongly withheld from him religious literature, blank prayer cards and holiday cards in violation of his rights under the first amendment to the United States constitution; article first, § 3, of the constitution of Connecticut; the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq. (2012) ; and the Connecticut Act Concerning Religious Freedom, General Statutes § 52-571b. The plaintiff also alleged that the applicable department administrative directives justifying the department's actions were not promulgated in accordance with the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act, General Statutes § 4-166 et seq. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the defendants, from which the plaintiff now appeals. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The record and the trial court's opinion reveal the following facts and procedural history. The plaintiff is presently incarcerated at Cheshire. While incarcerated, the plaintiff began studying to become a Catholic priest. In the course of his studies, the plaintiff ordered three used religious books, which were subsequently mailed to Cheshire. Upon arrival at Cheshire, these books were rejected by department personnel in accordance with department policy prohibiting inmates from receiving books that are not in "new condition." The plaintiff was also sent religious newspapers by some third party associated with Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church in Hartford. Because these were not sent directly from a publisher or commercial vendor, these newspapers were rejected in accordance with department policies. At various times, the plaintiff was mailed blank religious prayer cards by religious organizations in recognition of his monetary donations to these organizations. The prayer cards were rejected because department policy prohibits inmates from receiving mail containing blank envelopes. Last, the plaintiff was mailed a few religious and nonreligious holiday cards, some of which were homemade. These were rejected on the basis of concerns that such cards may be used to smuggle illegal drugs through the adhesives or decorative materials; nonetheless, the plaintiff received black and white photocopies of these cards.
On the basis of the rejection of these several items of mail, the plaintiff filed his complaint with the Superior Court on June 1, 2016. Following three days of evidence, the court, Ecker , J ., issued a forty-three page memorandum of decision rendering judgment in favor of the defendants on all counts on September 4, 2018. This appeal followed.
Upon examination of the record on appeal and the briefs and arguments of the parties, we conclude that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. Because the court's memorandum of decision thoroughly addresses the arguments raised in this appeal, we adopt its well reasoned decision as a proper statement of the facts and the applicable law on the issues. See Gawlik v. Semple , Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven, Docket No. CV-16-5036776-S (September 4, 2018) (reprinted at 197 Conn. App., A.3d). It would serve no useful purpose for this court to engage in any further discussion. See, e.g., Woodruff v. Hemingway , 297 Conn. 317, 321, 2 A.3d 857 (2010) ; Samakaab v. Dept. of Social Services , 178 Conn. App. 52, 54, 173 A.3d 1004 (2017).
The judgment is affirmed.
Appendix
JAN GAWLIK v. SCOTT SEMPLE ET AL.*
Superior Court, Judicial District of New Haven
Memorandum filed September 4, 2018
Memorandum of decision in action alleging violation of plaintiff's rights to religious freedom. Judgment for the defendants .
Jan Gawlik , self-represented, the plaintiff.
Steven R. Strom , assistant attorney general, for the defendants.
This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief brought by an inmate at the Cheshire Correctional Institution (Cheshire) against various prison officials and staff. The plaintiff, Jan Gawlik, claims that the defendants have violated his constitutional and statutory rights to religious freedom by refusing to deliver incoming mail containing blank religious "prayer cards" and matching envelopes, used religious books, and religious newspapers sent from a source other than the publisher. He seeks a declaratory judgment holding that his religious rights have been violated by the defendants' practices and policies governing delivery of these items, and an injunction requiring the Commissioner of Correction to delete those portions of the Department of Correction (department) administrative directives that prohibit the delivery of such items. He also seeks a judicial declaration that the administrative directives at issue were promulgated illegally because the department adopted them without complying with the procedural requirements of the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (UAPA), General Statutes § 4-166 et seq.
A bench trial was held before the undersigned judge on January 25, 2017, January 31, 2017, and March 22, 2017. Extensive posttrial briefs were submitted by the parties. 1
For the reasons that follow, judgment is entered in favor of the defendants.
The plaintiff, Jan Gawlik, is serving a sixty year sentence for murder. He is incarcerated at the Cheshire Correctional Institution, which houses approximately 1300 inmates. Gawlik describes himself as a devout Catholic. His family is from Poland. He speaks Polish and was raised as a "Polish Catholic." Gawlik has decided that he wants to become a Catholic priest and is engaged in a self directed course of study toward that end.2 He also takes part in many religious practices and activities at Cheshire. He participates in daily mass services and also attends a collective weekly mass on Wednesdays. On Mondays, he attends a weekly Bible study class run by volunteers from the Legion of Mary. He attends a weekly confirmation class conducted by one of the prison chaplains, Deacon Robles. Gawlik also reads religious texts and books about religion; he has access to many religious books, including various Bibles and other texts, and keeps approximately fifteen (15) different religion related books in his cell. He also donates money from his prison account to outside religious organizations that aid poor, hungry, homeless, and/or disabled individuals.
The plaintiff's present lawsuit complains that his religious freedom and other rights are being violated by department employees at Cheshire as a result of their refusal to deliver certain types of incoming mail to him. Four types of incoming mail are at issue. The first is used books. Three used books ordered by the plaintiff were rejected by department staff: (1) a used copy of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, promulgated by Pope John Paul II; (2) a book entitled The Book of Angels; and (3) a book entitled International Eucharistic Congress Pictorial Album.3 See Plaintiff's Exhibits 22, 33, 36, 37, 38, 56, 56-A. All three books were purchased by the plaintiff from a company called Preserving Christian Publications, Inc. See Plaintiff's Exhibit 35 (company catalogue, August-September, 2016). All three books are religious in nature.
Upon delivery to the mail room at Cheshire, the books were rejected by department personnel under the authority of either or both of two provisions of department administrative directive 10.7 ("Inmate Communications"). The first directive, administrative directive 10.7 (4) (G) (1) ("Review, Inspection and Rejection"), includes the following general authorization to reject mail after the mandated inspection: "All incoming general correspondence may be rejected if such review discloses correspondence or material(s) which would reasonably jeopardize legitimate penological interests, including, but not limited to ... (a) [preventing] the transport of contraband in or out of the facility ...." The second directive, administrative directive 10.7 (4) (N) ("Incoming Publications and Educational Materials"), states in relevant part: "An inmate may order books in new condition only from a publisher, book club, or book store."4 (Emphasis added.) The department's underlying security concerns are discussed [in part II A of this opinion].
The second type of rejected material consists of newspapers mailed to Gawlik from outside sources other than the publisher. The newspapers included The Catholic Transcript, which is a publication of the Archdiocese of Hartford, Narod Polski, a bilingual publication of the Polish Roman Catholic Union of America, and various Polish language newspaper editions published by the New Britain Herald. See Plaintiff's Exhibit 6. The newspapers evidently were forwarded to the plaintiff by someone associated with Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church in Hartford and perhaps other sources; they were not mailed to the plaintiff directly from the publisher or a commercial vendor.5 Department staff explained to the plaintiff at the time that the newspapers were rejected by department personnel on the ground that "magazines and newspapers [are] allowed only by subscription or if mailed directly from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Luth v. OEM Controls, Inc.
...thorough discussion contained therein. See, e.g., State v. Sebben , 201 Conn. App. 376, 380, 243 A.3d 365 (2020) ; Gawlik v. Semple , 197 Conn. App. 83, 86, 231 A.3d 326, cert. denied, 335 Conn. 953, 238 A.3d 730 (2020), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 141 S. Ct. 1713, 209 L. Ed. 2d 479 (2021)......
-
Gawlik v. Semple
...assistant attorney general, in opposition.The plaintiff's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 197 Conn. App. 83, 231 A.3d 326 (2020), is denied. ECKER, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this ...