Negrete v. New Jersey

• Decision Date: 29 November 2022
• Docket Number: Civ. 19-18480 (GC) (DEA)
• Parties: JOSE NEGRETE, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

JOSE NEGRETE, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, et al., Defendants.

Civ. No. 19-18480 (GC) (DEA)

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

November 29, 2022

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OPINION

GEORGETTE CASTNER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Jose Negrete (“Plaintiff' or “Negrete”), is a state prisoner at the New Jersey State Prison (“NJSP) in Trenton New Jersey. He is proceeding pro se with an Amended Complaint. (See Am. Compl., ECF 1 at 7-21). Presently pending before the Court is Defendants' the State of New Jersey, the New Jersey Department of Corrections (hereinafter the “NJDOC”), Bruce Davis, Craig Sears, Victor M. Lee and Jamal El-Chebli (collectively the “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (See ECF 26). For the following reasons, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in part and denied in part. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiffs First Amendment free exercise claim related to the classes and programs offered at NJSP. Plaintiffs Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1 et seq., however, shall be permitted to proceed against all Defendants as will his First Amendment retaliation claim and free exercise claim as to his inability to access a copy of the Quran against Defendants Davis, Sears, Lee and El-Chebli (hereinafter the “Individual Defendants”).

Plaintiff's other First Amendment claims against the State of New Jersey and the NJDOC are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim.

II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff was (and remains) incarcerated at NJSP during the period giving rise to the action in this case. (See Defs.' Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute, ECF 26-2 ¶ 2). In addition to suing the State of New Jersey and the NJDOC, as indicated above, Plaintiff also names the following individuals as Defendants:

1. Victor Lee - State Coordinator for the Office of Chaplaincy Services (see id. ¶ 2);

2. Jamal El-Chebli - Iman and Chaplain Supervisor at NJSP (see id. ¶ 3);

3. Bruce Davis - Administrator of NJSP (see id. ¶ 4); and

4. Craig Sears - Major at NJSP (see id. ¶ 5)

Plaintiff sues the Defendants for purportedly violating his religious rights and freedoms under RLUIPA, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1 et seq. Plaintiff also sues the Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating his free exercise rights and right to be free from retaliation under the First Amendment.

The case mainly arises from Plaintiffs ongoing dispute with the types of Islamic religious classes and programs that are offered at NJSP and the subsequent actions by the Defendants in response to his complaints. Plaintiff is a practicing Muslim (see ECF 1 at 8) and seeks to have his sect, As-Salafiyah, recognized as its own Islamic denomination within NJSP. (See ECF 26-2 ¶¶ 12-13), While NJSP offers inmates classes with respect to Islam, Plaintiff states that the classes offered are insufficient with respect to how he wishes to practice his faith. (See id, ¶¶ 17-20). According to Plaintiff, the non-denominational Islamic classes offered at NJSP, led by Defendant El-Chebli, are offensive based on his Islamic orthodoxy because “it's considered a sin. We're not allowed to sit with bida [sic]. We're not allowed to sit with people of innovation. That's one of the fundamentals in our religion.” (See ECF 26-2 ¶ 20). Plaintiff seeks to have practicing members of his orthodox faith separated and be permitted to have their own community within NJSP, including a separate Jumua'ah (Friday Islamic prayer service). (See id. ¶ 21).

Defendant El-Chebli and Plaintiff have clashed during the Islamic classes taught by El-Chebli. (See id. ¶ 22). More specifically, Plaintiff “does not want Iman El-Chebli to lead the classes or give any input while overseeing the class as [Plaintiff] does not consider him [ ]part of his affiliated denomination.” (See id. ¶ 23). Plaintiff claims based on his own religious creed and principles, he is not allowed to sit and learn by El-Chebli. (See id. ¶ 24).

As an inmate at NJSP, Plaintiff is permitted to read/and or have access to the Quran (with one period disputed by the parties discussed infra), attend Jumua'ah prayer services, fast during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan and pray five times daily. (See id. ¶ 8). In Islamic classes that are offered at NJSP, Plaintiff can also access books and CDs from relevant Islamic scholars in Plaintiffs Islamic orthodox sect. (See id. ¶ 10).

On or about June 11, 2019, Plaintiff spoke with Defendant El-Chebli whereby Plaintiff requested to lead classes and have Defendant El-Chebli sit quietly and not interrupt Plaintiff s teachings. (See id. ¶¶ 25-26). Plaintiff called Defendant El-Chebli a “deviant” at this meeting and that he knew Defendant El-Chebli's family well. (See id. ¶ 35).

Defendants maintain NJSP has a policy of prohibiting inmates from leading organized activities due to safety concerns. (See Decl. Lee, ECF 26-3 at 35-36). More specifically, Defendant Lee - State Coordinator for Chaplaincy Services - states as follows:

[t]he safety of the staff and inmates hinges on the ability of correctional staff to maintain control over the institution. If inmates are permitted by the [Department of Corrections] to assume a leadership role, they are tacitly placed in a position of control over other inmates. Abdicating this role to the inmates places the security of the prison in jeopardy as inmates can be persuaded to follow the inmate leader, rather than correctional staff and institutional rule regulations. [¶] The prohibition of inmates assuming control over other inmates in formalized gatherings through leadership positions is also consistent with the legitimate penological objective to prevent inmates from becoming catalysts to violence, disorder and escape.

(ECF 26-3 at 35-36). Defendants include in the record the Internal Management Procedure for Islamic inmates which states as follows: “[a]n Imam must be permitted to conduct the prayers and worship service and to attend to the religious needs of the Muslim inmates. In the absence of an Islamic chaplain an approved volunteer or staff member will supervise the service.” (See ECF 26 3 at 26). The policy also states that Muslim inmates must be permitted to have or be given access to the Quran. (See ECF 26-3 at 24).

Plaintiff challenges the application of NJSP's policy by arguing that inmates are permitted to represent other inmates at NJSP different from his religious sect. He alludes to unit representatives and paralegals who represent inmates at disciplinary proceedings as well as at NAACP, Native American and Odinist membership meetings. According to Plaintiff, only members of his religious sect are not permitted to have a “study group.” (See ECF 36 at 7). Indeed, Plaintiff testified as follows at his deposition:

You got Native American go out there and smoke cigars with a lighter and a match. And that's not a security threat. [¶] But me, studying my religion is a security threat? You got them guys, they don't have nobody out there. They go out there. They pray. You got them other guys, them - the Odinists, right, them Odinist people, they worship things. Right. They don't have nobody up there dictating what they believe in. The Jews, they don't have nobody dictating to them ....

We have - again, we have tier reps, right, inmates represent over a hundred people. We have teachers. We have - every religion got their guys that teach religion ....

Inmates - like I said, you have Native - you think Native American got somebody that come in here and run their service? They don't. The Odinists, them - them guys, they don't have nobody. There's no Odinist chaplain. Them guys go up there and they reach their own thing.

So again, what they telling you is absolutely not true. Other religions don't have their volunteers. Some don't have nobody but themselves. And they run their own services....

Odinists, inmates doing it. The Native America inmates doing it...

So, you know, you can't tell me that we're not being treated differently.

(Pl.'s Dep., ECF 38-1 at 74-75, 77-78). Defendants claim though that an approved volunteer can supervise religious services or classes, but that Plaintiff has failed to even seek out such possibilities with respect to his Islamic sect.

On or about June 13, 2019, officers came to Plaintiff's cell, subjected Plaintiff to a strip search and took his religious materials, books and literature. (See ECF 1 at 14; ECF 26-2 ¶ 36). Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Sears told him at the time that the search occurred because he threatened Defendant El-Chebli (at their June 11, 2019 meeting). (See ECF 26-2 ¶ 37).

For a period thereafter, Plaintiff was placed in administrative segregated housing and his personal belongings were locked in his regular cell. (See ECF 26-2 ¶ 41). Plaintiff asserts that Defendants denied many requests by him to have a copy of the Quran while he was in administrative segregated housing. (See ECF 1 at 16). Plaintiff states that he was without a copy of the Quran for over three months. (See ECF 36 at 4).

On July 2,2019, Plaintiff received a disciplinary charge for threatening another with bodily harm or with any offense against him and his person related to what he told Defendant El-Chebli at their June 11, 2019 meeting. (See Decl. El-Chebli, ECF 26-3 at 40). The disciplinary hearing officer ultimately found Plaintiff guilty of threatening Defendant El-Chebli. (See ECF 26-2 ¶ 47). However, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, reversed this finding on appeal. (See id. ¶ 47). In reversing the disciplinary hearing officer's guilty finding, the Appellate Division held as follows:

[t]he hearing officer identified two remarks by Negrete as the basis for

...