Berrios v. Gouff
| Decision Date | 23 May 2023 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 1:22-cv-1651-LKG |
| Parties | OSBALDO LEMUS BERRIOS, Plaintiff, v. SGT. GOUFF, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
Defendants Brian Gouff, Jerry Keplinger, Edward Reagan, Joshua Castle James Hendershot, Kenneth Hardman, Robert Bush, Jeffrey West Walter Donoway, Cindy Sebring, and the State of Maryland have filed a Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment in response to this civil rights complaint filed by self-represented Plaintiff Osbaldo Lemus Berrios. ECF No. 25. Berrios has opposed the motion (ECF No. 33) and filed a Motion to Subpoena Videos (ECF No. 34). Defendants oppose Berrios's Motion to Subpoena Videos. ECF No. 35. The issues are fully briefed; no hearing is necessary to resolve the issues pending before the Court. See Loc. R. 105.6 (D. Md. 2021). For the reasons set forth below the Court now GRANTS Defendants' Motion construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment, and DENIES Berrios's Motion to Subpoena Videos.
Berrios is an inmate committed to the custody of the Maryland Division of Correction and currently incarcerated at Roxbury Correctional Institution (“RCI”). In his Amended Complaint, Berrios alleges that his legal paperwork was improperly confiscated by correctional officers at Eastern Correctional Institution (“ECI”) when he was transferred to Maryland Correctional Institution - Hagerstown (“MCIH”). ECF No. 3. He states the following regarding each of the named Defendants.
Lt. Donoway, who works at ECI, is alleged to have harassed and intimidated Berrios. ECF No. 3-1 at 34. Berrios states that in August of 2018, he wrote administrative remedy procedure complaints (“ARPs”) on Lt. Donoway “for being responsible for a man dying in the yard of his unit.... [h]e confiscated and destroyed the ARPs both times. Id. When Berrios reported where Lt. Donoway could find knives, he claims Lt. Donoway told the inmates who had the knives that Berrios “snitched on them.” Id. When Berrios asked him why he did this, Berrios claims that Donoway said that he did not like snitches. Id. Berrios claims that Donoway then told him he should ask David Perkins how he feels about snitches. Id. According to Berrios, Donoway caused Perkins to get assaulted with a razor to his face for which he received 150 stitches. Id. Berrios believes that Donoway ordered his transfer from ECI to MCIH and states that when he arrived at MCIH, a lot of his property and all of his legal paperwork was missing. Id.
Berrios states that Officer Bush, who works at MCIH, covered up the taking of his legal documents and “participated in harassment and intimidation” to cover up for other officers. ECF No. 3-1 at 33. Berrios claims that when he arrived at MCIH and Officer Bush unpacked his property, he told Bush that all his legal papers were missing. Id. at 52. Berrios asserts that on January 23, 2020, the “video cameras in the lobby of HU#5 will show that [he] was distracted while the cart that had all of [his] property was wheeled to a back room.” Id. at 51. According to Berrios, Bush knew his legal papers were taken by other officers but did nothing to help him. Id. He further claims that Bush put his life in danger by telling Officer Reagan that Berrios “paid for a missing screwdriver” and gave it to "intel. Id. Officer Reagan then told other inmates that Berrios did this and when Berrios complained to Bush, he responded that Berrios should “leave my boy alone.” Id.
According to Berrios, Officer Reagan is the officer who is called upon to “lean on and harass inmates because he's in control of property.” ECF No. 3-1 at 42. On an unspecified date, Berrios claims that Reagan went through his property and legal documents and gave him three choices: send it home, have it destroyed, or put it in storage. Id. Berrios states he asked for certain property and paperwork, unspecified in the Amended Complaint, to be sent home. Id. He claims, however, that the shipment never arrived. Id. During a dispute with Berrios's cellmate, Berrios recalls that Reagan called his cellmate a “dumb-ass” and remarked that, “when you look into my face, you look into Lt. Donoway's face . . . because we are the greatest, we are the Masons.” Id. at 42.
Berrios claims that between March and May 12, 2022, while housed at MCIH, Sgt. Gouff “started his systematic harassment and intimidation” after Berrios witnessed Sgt. Gouff “in a sexual situation with an inmate.” ECF No. 3-1 at 36. Although Berrios assured Sgt. Gouff that he had not seen anything, Berrios claims that Sgt. Gouff used continuous cell searches and property inventory to harass him. Id. Berrios states that, “He and his officers confiscated legal documents.” Id. He further states that he has a confiscation form dated March 10, 2022, for the property and the paperwork that was taken from him. Id. Although the property and paperwork were supposed to be sent to his family, Berrios claims that none of the property or the legal paperwork ever reached his family's home. Id. Berrios adds that another inmate, 1 avoir Small, was told by Sgt. Gouff and Lt. Keplinger, that Berrios had written a statement stating that Small was selling drugs and engaging in extortion placing Berrios's life in danger. Id.
Berrios asserts that he reported an incident to Lt. Keplinger involving “the inmate picture man,” Edwin Reyes, where Reyes “made copies of my photos and sent them out to my enemies.” ECF No. 3-1 at 40. Berrios alleges that the pictures were “later sent into prison to a MS-13 gang member who was paid to kill me.” Id. According to Berrios, the picture was also used to set up a fake Facebook profile and Lt. Keplinger “did nothing” even though Berrios's life was in danger. Id. Berrios claims that Lt. Keplinger allowed Sgt. Gouff “and everybody under him” to harass and intimidate Berrios; allowed his legal documents to be stolen; and refused to report “anything” Berrios told him. Id.
Berrios alleges that Sgt. West, who works at MCIH, confiscated his property and his legal documents between March 2022 and May 12, 2022. ECF No. 3-1 at 38. Berrios claims that Sgt. West told him “every day that he was going to smuggle me back to Mexico” and when Berrios told him he was not Mexican, Sgt. West told him it did not matter because “we all look the same.” Id. Berrios alleges Sgt. West called him a “dirty Mexican” all the time and kicked his cell door, or hit his door with his key ring to “break my peace.” Id. He further claims that West allowed another inmate to keep his TV and X-Box game system even after Berrios showed him paperwork establishing that the items were his. Id. According to Berrios, he was “forced to buy my own TV [and] X-Box back ... for $350.” Id. Sgt. West allegedly told Berrios that he was being moved because he was “in Sgt. Gouff s business.” Id.
On an unspecified date between “March 2022 [and] May 12, 2022,” Berrios claims Lt. Castle came to his cell with another Lieutenant that he did not know for the purpose of harassing and intimidating him because he had filed ARPs about Lt. Donoway at ECI. ECF No. 3-1 at 41. Lt. Castle and the other officer began searching Berrios's cell. Id. Berrios claims they were handling his property so roughly that they broke his MP-3 Player and his beard trimmers; Berrios has never received compensation for the damage to his property. Id. During the search, Berrios claims he noticed Lt. Castle was reading his legal documents. Id. When he asked Lt. Castle why he was reading the documents, Lt. Castle responded that he was not reading them but was looking for “contraband or affiliations.” Id. Berrios claims that “when they left a lot of my legal documents were gone.” Id.
Officer Hendershot accompanied Sgt. Gouff, Officer Reagan, and Lt. Keplinger "between March 2022 and May 12, 2022” when Berrios's cell was searched. ECF No. 3-1 at 44. Berrios further claims that Hendershot, Gouff, and Keplinger attempted to bribe another inmate if he would sign a statement saying that Berrios sells drugs and engages in extortion. Id.
Berrios alleges that Officer Hardman[1] participated in the harassment and intimidation and covered for other officers who confiscated his legal paperwork. ECF no. 3-1 at 46.
Ms. Sebring, a case manager at MCIH, allegedly lied to Berrios and “used her position to do Sgt. Gouff s bidding.” ECF No. 3-1 at 47. Berrios states that an example of this is Ms. Sebring transferring him to RCI instead of Maryland Correctional Institution- Jessup, where he was going to participate in a program. Id. Berrios adds that Ms. Sebring told him, “she was proud to be a part of the Mason group” and that she always made racist comments to him. Id.
Berrios attaches affidavits from nine other inmates who support the claims he raises. ECF No. 3-1 at 1-32. The statements provided by inmates Nathan Harrington, Robert Thomas, Branden Williams, Calvin Hill, and Darrell Mainor are not signed by the purported affiants. Generally, “[a]n affidavit or declaration used to support or oppose a motion must be made on personal knowledge, set out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show that the affiant or declarant is competent to testify on the matters stated.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(4). Affidavits submitted to support or oppose summary judgment may not be conclusory or based on hearsay. See Melo v. Zumper, Inc., 439 F.Supp.3d 683, 693 (E.D. Va. 2020) (citing Evans v. Techs. Applications & Serv. Co., 80 F.3d 954, 962 (4th Cir. 1996)). Absent a signature indicating that the author of the statement has adopted the statement as his own, the affidavits of Harrington, Thomas, Williams, Hill, and Mainor will not be considered as evidence by this Court.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial