Hamilton v. N.Y. State Dep't of Corrs. & Cmty. Supervision
| Decision Date | 17 August 2021 |
| Docket Number | 9:18-CV-1312 (MAD/CFH) |
| Parties | DERRICK M. HAMILTON, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York |
Derreck M. Hamilton
Auburn Correctional Facility
Plaintiff pro se
Attorney General for the State of New York
Attorney for Defendants
MELISSA A. LATINO, ESQ.
Assistant Attorney General
REPORT-RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER[1]
Plaintiff pro se Derreck M. Hamilton (“plaintiff”), an inmate who was, at all relevant times, in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”), brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging that defendants Acting Commissioner of DOCCS, Anthony Annucci (“Annucci”); Superintendent of Auburn Correctional Facility (“Auburn C.F.”), Harold Graham ( ); DOCCS Deputy Commissioner of Programs, Jeffery McKoy (“McKoy”); DOCCS Director of Ministerial, Family and Volunteer Services (“DMVS”), Cheryl Morris (“Morris”); DOCCS Director of DOCCS Bureau of Internal Controls, Paul Guenette (“Guenette”); former Auburn C.F. Deputy Superintendent for Programs, Galyn Schenk (“Schenk”); Auburn C.F. Steward, Debra Vanni (“Vanni”); Auburn C.F. Food Services Commissioner, Anthony Bertonica (“Bertonica”); Auburn C.F. Correction Sergeant, Jeffrey Porten (“Sgt. Porten”); former Auburn C.F. Inmate Organization Coordinator, David Porter (“Porter”); Auburn C.F. Recreation Program Leader, Ron Pitoniak (“Pitoniak”); Staff Advisor, Travis Silcox (“Silcox”); and Auburn C.F. Correction Officers, Alec Venditti (“C.O. Venditti”), Michael Delfavero (“C.O. Delfavero”)-who, at all relevant times, were employed by DOCCS-violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. See Dkt. No. 15 ( ).
The following of plaintiff's claims survived the Court's sua sponte review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b): (1) First Amendment Free Exercise Clause and Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause claims against Graham, Venditti, and Delfavero concerning the October 31, 2015 Transfiguration Day celebration; (2) First Amendment Free Exercise Clause and Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause claims against Graham based on the time provided for Rastafarian worship in the Auburn C.F. chapel on December 27, 2015; (3) Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause claim against Graham based on the number of Rastafarian inmates permitted to enter the chapel to worship on February 14, 2016; (4) First Amendment retaliation claims against based on Graham's and Sgt. Porten's alleged threats of confining plaintiff to Special Housing Unit (“SHU”) if he continued to attend Rastafarian religious services; (5) First Amendment Free Exercise and Establishment Clause claims against Annucci, McKoy, Morris, Guerette, and Graham for allegedly establishing and/or revising DOCCS policy to permit homosexual inmates to prepare and/or service food to Rastafarian inmates; (6) First Amendment Free Exercise Clause and retaliation claims against Bertonica for allegedly forcing plaintiff to eat food served to him by homosexual inmates and issuing plaintiff a false misbehavior report in retaliation for filing a grievance about the purported pro-homosexual food handling policy; (7) First Amendment claim alleging that Schenk, Vanni, Porter, Silcox, and Pitoniak retaliated against him for speaking out against purported misappropriation of funds in the Caribbean African Unity (“CAU”) account by suspending the CAU. See Dkt. No. 16 at 49. Presently pending before the Court is defendants' motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Fed. R. Civ. P.”) 56. See Dkt. No. 59. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to defendants' motion. See Dkt. No. 79. For the reasons that follow, it is recommended that defendants' motion be granted in part and denied in part.
A. Plaintiff's Factual Assertions and Claims[2]
The facts are reviewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff as the non-moving party. See subsection II.A., infra.
Plaintiff was transferred from the Great Meadow Correctional Facility (“Great Meadow C.F.”) SHU to the Auburn C.F. SHU on October 21, 2015. See Amen. Compl. at 15 ¶ 66. Plaintiff knew that other Rastafari inmates at Auburn C.F. would celebrate Transfiguration Day on November 2, 2015. See id. at ¶ 71. Therefore, plaintiff wrote to “members of the []Auburn[ C.F.] administration on arrival, including . . . Graham[, ] informing them that all disciplinary sanctions against [him] would end on October 30, 2015.” Id. at ¶ 69. Plaintiff states that he “also wrote [former] defendant Tomandl informing him when [his] disciplinary sanctions ended and [his] desire to be placed on all Rastafari call-outs, for [c]lasses and services (“Nyahbinghi”), ” including Transfiguration Day. Id. at 16 ¶ 71. Plaintiff did not receive any response to his correspondence from Tomanld, the Rastafari staff advisor, or any other member of the Auburn C.F. Administration. See id. at 16-17 ¶ 73. Plaintiff contends that “[similarly situated prisoners who belong to other faith groups, especially mainstream Christians and Muslims . . ., who wrote pre-SHU release letters were allowed to attend their religious commemorations upon release.” Id. at 17 ¶ 74.
Plaintiff alleges that, at 7:00 a.m. on October 30, 2015, he “informed staff” that he had completed his SHU sanctions “and presented the hearing disposition as proof.” Amen. Compl. at 17 ¶ 75. Plaintiff alleges that, sometime that afternoon, the SHU supervisor informed him that he would not be released until the next day “per orders from our supervisor” because plaintiff had “pissed somebody off.” Id. at ¶ 76. On October 31, 2015, plaintiff was released from SHU and moved to a general population cell. See Id. at ¶ 79.
During the morning go-around on November 2, 2015, plaintiff asked C.O. Delfavero to place him on the list to attend Transfiguration Day. See Amen. Compl. at 17 ¶ 82. C.O.s Delfavero and Venditti refused to allow plaintiff to attend the Transfiguration Day celebration on the basis that plaintiff was listed “as a Jew” and, therefore, was not allowed to attend a Rastafari event. Id. at 18 ¶ 88. Plaintiff states that he explained the significance of Transfiguration Day in the Rastafari faith, “objected” to being characterized as Jewish, informed those defendants that Captain (“Capt.”) Diego had granted him oral permission to attend the event, and requested that C.O.s Delfavero and Venditti call the chaplain's office or Capt. Diego to confirm that he was not Jewish. Id. at 19 ¶ 89; see id. at ¶ 93. In response, C.O.s Delfavero and Venditti threatened to issue plaintiff a misbehavior report. See id. at ¶ 93. Plaintiff posits that C.O.s Delfavero's and Venditti's actions “substantially burdened [his] sincerely held religious beliefs” by causing him to miss out on the “highest form of [Rastafari] worship.” Id. at ¶¶ 94, 95. Plaintiff further contends that C.O.s Delfavero and Venditti “imposed additional substantial burdens on [his] free exercise of [his] religious beliefs” by preventing other Rastafari inmates “from delivering [his Transfiguration Day] sacramental meal, by claiming [he] was ‘Jewish.'” Id. at ¶ 99. In response to C.O.s Delfavero's and Venditti's actions, plaintiff alleges that he filed grievance No. AUB-68310-15. See id. at 22 ¶ 113.
Liberally construed, the Amended Complaint alleges that Supt. Graham, C.O. Delfavero, and C.O. Venditti violated plaintiff's First Amendment right to freely exercise his religion by preventing him from attending the Transfiguration Day celebrations and receiving his sacramental meal by erroneously labeling him as Jewish. See Amen. Compl. at 18-19 ¶¶ 88, 99. Further, plaintiff alleges a Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause violation against Graham, C.O. Delfavero, and C.O. Venditti for failing to place him on the call-out and feed-up lists, as they did with “[s]imilarly situated prisoners who belong to other faith groups, especially mainstream Christians and Muslims.” Id. at 17 ¶ 74.
Plaintiff alleges that, on December 27, 2015, Supt. Graham limited plaintiff's Rastafarian worship in the Auburn C.F. chapel to five minutes from 10:20 a.m. until 10:25 a.m. See Amen. Compl. at 22 ¶¶ 115-116. However, plaintiff alleges that, “while [he] was arbitrarily denied the right to free exercise of [his] sincerely held religious [b]elief, on that same day the similarly situated” Protestant prisoners were afforded two-and-a-half hours for their services. Id. at ¶ 117. Plaintiff filed grievance No. AUB-68521-15 relating to this incident. See id. at 23 ¶ 118. Further, plaintiff alleges that, on February 14, 2016, Supt. Graham ordered correction officers to allow only five Rastafari inmates into the chapel at time to worship, while Protestant inmates were allowed into the chapel “en masse.” Id. at 23 ¶ 121; see id. at 32 ¶ 168.
Liberally construing the Amended Complaint, plaintiff alleges that Supt. Graham violated his First Amendment right to freely exercise his religion by limiting the time and the number of participants for the Rastafarian services on December 27, 2015, and February 14, 2016, respectively. See Amen. Coml. at 31, 32 ¶¶ 165, 168. Plaintiff also alleges Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection violations against Supt. Graham based on the foregoing alleged limitations on Rastafarian services, which he posits were not imposed on Protestant inmates. See id. at 22, 31 ¶¶ 117, 166.
Plaintiff alleges that, on February 25, 2016, Sgt. Porten and Graham “sought to...
To continue reading
Request your trial