Spicer v. Collins
| Decision Date | 14 May 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. Civ.A. 1:95CV1001.,Civ.A. 1:95CV1001. |
| Citation | 9 F.Supp.2d 673 |
| Parties | Rickey Gene SPICER v. James A. COLLINS, et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas |
Rickey Gene Spicer, pro se.
Plaintiff Rickey Gene Spicer, an inmate confined at the Stiles Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division (TDCJ-ID), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this civil rights complaint against James A. Collins, Jimmy E. Alford, Leland Heuszel, Melton Brock, Jimmy Rollo, James McCormick, Roy Brown, Jeffrey Murray, Raymond Watkins, Eric Walker, Christopher Ivins, Kelley Waller, John Gearheart, Richard Gunnels, Jeffrey Taylor, Calvin Tucker, Ernest Lott, R. Mills, Shana Carroll, Kent Ramsey, and Richard Pustka. Defendant Collins is the former director of TDCJ. Defendant Ramsey is the Regional Director of TDCJ-ID. Defendants Alford, Heuszel, Brock, and Pustka are either former or current wardens of the Eastham Unit. The remaining defendants are employed as correctional officers at the Eastham Unit.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the plaintiff has consented to proceed before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff filed his original complaint on November 6, 1995 and an amended complaint on July 21, 1997. Upon initial examination, the court was unable to determine whether plaintiff's claims have merit. Accordingly, plaintiff was ordered to file amended pleadings in the form of responses to questionnaires in order to provide a more detailed factual discussion of his claims. See Cay v. Estelle, 789 F.2d 318 (5th Cir.1986); Watson v. Ault, 525 F.2d 886 (5th Cir.1976). Additionally, on July 15, 1997, the undersigned conducted an evidentiary hearing during which plaintiff testified. See Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir.1985). In preparing this Memorandum Opinion, the undersigned considered plaintiff's original and amended complaints, his amended pleadings, and the testimony at the evidentiary hearing.
On May 22, 1994, plaintiff alleges defendants Murray and Walker conspired to refuse plaintiff permission to leave his cell to go to the pill window. Plaintiff alleges he was on cell restriction and commissary restriction at the time and was, therefore, only allowed out of his cell to get his evening medication. Plaintiff alleges he was taking 25 mg. of Elavil for neck and back pain. Plaintiff did not receive his medication until the next day. As a result of the delay, plaintiff alleges he endured severe mental suffering. Plaintiff claims he filed grievances against defendants Murray and Walker that same day.
On October 20, 1994, defendant Murray allegedly threatened to assault plaintiff. Plaintiff contends he was threatened because he had filed a grievance against defendant Murray. Plaintiff alleges defendants Ivins and Walker were present while defendant Murray threatened plaintiff.
On November 7, 1994, plaintiff was rolling a cigarette while waiting for another inmate. Plaintiff had placed his package of tobacco on the inside entrance bars of the H-Line door. As plaintiff reached for the package, it fell to the ground. Plaintiff claims that when the tobacco fell, defendant Murray ran over to the plaintiff and said he would write plaintiff a disciplinary case for "Trafficking and Trading" as a payback. Plaintiff alleges the disciplinary charges were never pursued, but plaintiff's tobacco was confiscated in violation of TDCJ policy. Defendant alleges he brought this incident to the attention of defendant Brown on November 10, 1994. Defendant Brown allegedly told plaintiff that he thought the plaintiff was lying and that the plaintiff was always lying and complaining. Plaintiff also alleges defendant Brown told plaintiff that if he was unable to speak or breathe, defendant Brown would not have to listen to plaintiff's problems.
Plaintiff alleges he was taking medication which expired on November 21, 1994. Plaintiff alleges the medical staff issued plaintiff a pass to go to the pill window and placed an orange sticker on the back of plaintiff's identification card so he would be able to go to the pill window to pick up the medication. When plaintiff returned to his housing area, he alleges defendant Murray told defendant Watkins to take plaintiff's identification card because plaintiff could not have gone to the pill window and returned so quickly. Defendant Watkins took plaintiff's card and gave it to defendant Murray. Defendant Murray allegedly called the infirmary pill window to ask about plaintiff's medication. Plaintiff alleges the nurse told defendant Murray that plaintiff's prescription had expired, but plaintiff had been given an extension on the medication. Defendant Watkins told plaintiff to walk over and get his identification card. When he refused to comply with the order, defendant Watkins threatened to slam plaintiff to the ground.
At defendant Murray's urging, defendant Watkins filed disciplinary charges against plaintiff for lying to an officer, possessing contraband, and creating a disturbance. Plaintiff was found guilty of the disciplinary offenses and was punished with fifteen days of commissary restriction.
Plaintiff alleges he was harassed and threatened by defendants Murray, Watkins, Ivins, Waller, Gearheart, and by Jason Jeffus on December 24, 1994. Plaintiff alleges defendants Rollo and McCormick ordered the officers to harass inmates who file grievances, including the plaintiff.
When plaintiff returned to his housing area after recreation on January 28, 1995, he saw defendant Murray standing near Officer Jeffus. Plaintiff claims defendant Murray told Officer Jeffus that plaintiff was a writ writer and Officer Jeffus replied that "those grievances burn just like a house will burn." Plaintiff alleges he filed a grievance about this incident because he feared for his safety.
On January 30, 1995, defendants Murray, Waller, and Gearheart were standing in front of the pill window when plaintiff arrived to pick up his medication. Plaintiff alleges the defendants ordered plaintiff to stop and defendant Murray ordered plaintiff to stand facing the wall. Plaintiff alleges defendant Murray claimed plaintiff had threatened him and defendants Waller and Gearheart were witnesses to the threats.
Plaintiff alleges he filed a grievance with defendant Alford on April 15, 1995 about the threats he had received from defendants Murray, Walker, Gearheart, Waller, Watkins, and Ivins. Plaintiff also alleges he had a "warden interview" with defendants Brock and Pace. Plaintiff alleges he told defendants Brock about the officers threatening plaintiff and writing false disciplinary cases in retaliation against plaintiff for filing grievances. Plaintiff alleges defendants Brock and Pace said they would investigate the situation.
On May 12, 1995, plaintiff alleges he told a psychologist about the grievances he had written against various officers. Plaintiff alleges the psychologist called Internal Affairs. When plaintiff wrote a sick call request on June 30, 1995 to see the psychologist, he was told that she was no longer assigned to the unit.
In August of 1995, plaintiff spoke with Lieutenant Joseph Henderson from Internal Affairs about the threats made by officers. Plaintiff was told that Henderson would return soon to speak again with plaintiff.
Plaintiff claims defendants Gunnels and Taylor started a vigilante organization sometime before February 4, 1995 to discipline African American inmates for disciplinary violations by beating them. Plaintiff alleges he violated a rule against masturbating in public on February 25, 1995. According to the plaintiff, defendants Taylor and Gunnels authorized Officers Davis Murray, Jason Chaves, Joe Bennett, and Robert Duhon to assault plaintiff. However, plaintiff was never beaten by these officers.
Defendant Gunnels allegedly told plaintiff that an officer on first or second shift would prosecute plaintiff sooner or later and that plaintiff was like all of the other lying black inmates.
On August 18, 1995, plaintiff alleges defendant Murray threatened to beat plaintiff if he ever masturbated in front of officers Georgia Murray and Sada McFarland.
Plaintiff alleges he tried to tell defendant Brock about the threats on August 23, 1995 while they were in the hallway. Plaintiff alleges defendant Brock did not hear what plaintiff was saying because he was too busy, but defendant Brock allegedly told plaintiff to speak with defendant Pace.
Although plaintiff contends he was threatened on a number of occasions, he admits he was never physically harmed by any of the defendants.
Plaintiff alleges defendants Alford and Collins failed to take any action to protect the plaintiff.
Plaintiff alleges the defendants actions were all taken in retaliation because plaintiff had filed a civil rights action against Major John Sharp, Major A.R. Massingill, Chief of Classification Charles Frizzels, Assistant Warden J.N. Barratt, and Senior Warden C.R. Martin. Plaintiff alleges Major Sharp and Major Massingill had told the defendants about the previous lawsuit. Plaintiff also claims he had filed grievances against each of the named defendants before filing this lawsuit.
On July 21, 1997, plaintiff amended his complaint asserting claims entirely unrelated to those raised in his original complaint. The amended complaint involved alleged constitutional violations that occurred in 1996 and 1997.
On October 19, 1996, plaintiff attempted to speak with Sergeant Maczeal while he was in the dining hall for breakfast. As plaintiff began to walk towards Sergeant Maczeal, defendant Lott allegedly grabbed plaintiff by the arm and asked him where he was going. Plaintiff replied that he was going to speak with Sergeant Maczeal....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pendleton v. Mills
...which, if it occurred, would be considered unusually brutal. McFadden v. Lucas, 713 F.2d 143, 146 (5th Cir. 1983); Spicer v. Collins, 9 F. Supp. 2d 673, 683 (E.D.Tex.1998).9 When Corporal Mills's comment is measured against these standards, it falls far short of amounting to the sort of con......
-
Pendleton v Mills, 00-03097
...which, if it occurred, would be considered unusually brutal. McFadden v. Lucas, 713 F.2d 143, 146 (5th Cir. 1983); Spicer v. Collins, 9 F. Supp. 2d 673, 683 (E.D. Tex. 1998).9 When Corporal Mills's comment is measured against these standards, it falls far short of amounting to the sort of c......
-
Fillmore v. Taylor
...otherwise directly and adversely affect release on mandatory supervision will impose upon a liberty interest." Spicer v. Collins , 9 F.Supp.2d 673, 685 (E.D. Tex. 1998).1 ¶ 57 When a prison disciplinary hearing may result in the loss of a prisoner's good conduct credits, Wolff held that the......
-
Wamble v. Cnty. of Jones
...Cir.1993); e.g., Jennings v. Natrona County Detention Center Medical Facility, 1999 WL 248634, *4 (10th Cir. 1999); Spicer v. Collins, 9 F.Supp.2d 673, 682 (E.D. Tex.1998); Thompson v. Hamilton, 127 F.3d. 1109 (10th Cir. 1997).Claims Against Sheriff Alex Hodge Individually It is black lette......