Taylor v. Pennsylvania

• Decision Date: 12 December 2018
• Docket Number: CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-3369
• Parties: ROBERT TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

ROBERT TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al., Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-3369

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

December 12, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 4

II. BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 5

III. STANDARD OF REVIEW .................................................................................................... 10

IV ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................. 11

A. All Claims Against the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility and the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office Will Be Dismissed ...................................................... 12

B. Plaintiff Fails to State a Monell Claim Against the City of Philadelphia .................. 13

1. Plaintiff Fails to Plead a Monell Claim Regarding the Events of His November 15, 2016 Arrest ...................................................................................... 16

a. Plaintiff's Allegations Regarding His Arrest, Imprisonment, and the Search and Seizure Do Not Establish a Fourth Amendment Violation .......................... 16

b. Plaintiff Does Not Link His Arrest, Imprisonment, or Search and Seizure Injury to a Policy, Custom, or Deliberate Indifference by a Municipal Policymaker ...................................................................................... 18

2. Plaintiff Fails to State a Monell Claim With Respect to Mail Tampering and Denial of Access to the Court at the CFCF ............................................................. 18

a. Plaintiff's Allegations Regarding Mail Tampering and Denial of Access to the Court Do Not Establish a Fourteenth Amendment Violation ....................... 19 b. Plaintiff Does Not Link His Mail Tampering or Access to the Courts Injury to a Policy, Custom, or Deliberate Indifference by a Municipal Policymaker ........................................................................................................ 20

3. Plaintiff Fails to State a Monell Claim With Respect to Overcrowding and Conditions of Confinement ..................................................................................... 21

a. Plaintiff's Overcrowding and Conditions of Confinement Allegations Establish the First Prong of a Monell Claim ...................................................... 21

i. Plaintiff's Claims Regarding Triple-Celling at the CFCF Sufficiently Establish the First Prong of a Monell Claim ................................................. 23

ii. Plaintiff's Claims Regarding Cold Air at the CFCF Sufficiently Establish the First Prong of a Monell Claim ................................................. 25

iii. Plaintiff's Allegations Regarding Strip Searches at the CFCF Do Not Establish a Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment Violation .................. 27

iv. Plaintiff's Claims Regarding the Pepper Spray Incident at CFCF Do Not Establish a Fourteenth Amendment Violation .................................. 30

b. Plaintiff Fails to Sufficiently Link His Conditions of Confinement Injuries to a Policy, Custom, of Deliberate Indifference by a Municipal Policymaker ........................................................................................................ 33

4. Plaintiff Has Failed to State a Monell Claim With Respect to His Religious Deprivation and Discrimination Allegations ........................................................... 35

a. Plaintiff's Religious Deprivation and Discrimination Claims Sufficiently Establish the First Prong of a Monell Claim ..................................................... 35

i. The Prison's Delay in Delivering Plaintiff His Meals During Periods of Religious Fasting Does Not Violate the First Amendment ........................... 35

ii. Plaintiff's Claims that the CFCF Prevented Him from Practicing Islam Establish the First Prong of a Monell Claim ................................................. 37

b. Plaintiff Has Failed to Link His Alleged Religious Deprivation and Discrimination Injuries to a Policy, Custom, or Deliberate Indifference by a Municipal Policymaker ............................................................................. 39

5. Plaintiff Has Failed to State a Monell Claim With Respect to His Inadequate Medical Care Allegations ..................................................................... 41

C. Plaintiff Fails to State a Claim under § 1983 Against Warden Gerald May .............. 45

D. Plaintiff Fails to State a Claim under § 1983 Against Officer Obrien ....................... 49

E. Plaintiff Fails to State a § 1983 Claim Against Sergeant Lebesco ............................ 50

F. All State Law Claims Will Be Dismissed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 .................. 51

V CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 51

OPINION

Slomsky, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Robert Taylor, proceeding pro se, brings this suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights arising from his arrest on November 16, 2015. (Doc. No. 10.) Defendants are the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office, the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center, the Honorable Frank Palumbo, the City of Philadelphia, unnamed Philadelphia Police Officers, the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility ("CFCF"), the Defender Association, Warden Gerald May, the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office, Public Defender Christopher Angelo, Philadelphia Police Officer Obrien,¹ and Sergeant Lebesco, a prison official.² (Id. at 1-2.)

In the first cause of action in the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff alleges violations of his rights under the First, Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments by all Defendants. (Id. at 10.) In the second cause of action, Plaintiff asserts various state law claims against all Defendants. (Id. at 11.) Plaintiff seeks money damages and injunctive relief.

On June 4, 2018, Defendants City of Philadelphia, Officer Obrien, Warden Gerald May, and Sergeant Lebesco filed the present Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint for Failure toState a Claim. (Doc. No. 14.) In that same Motion, Defendants asked the Court to dismiss Plaintiff's claims against the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility and the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office because they are departments within the City of Philadelphia, and not proper parties to the suit. (Id. at 7.) Plaintiff has not filed a response to Defendants' Motion and has not requested additional time to do so. Nor has he requested the opportunity to further amend the Amended Complaint.

Defendants' Motion is now ripe for decision. For reasons stated below, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion (Doc. No. 14) in its entirety and dismiss Plaintiff's claims against the City of Philadelphia, Officer Obrien, Warden Gerald May, and Sergeant Lebesco.

II. BACKGROUND

On September 22, 2009, Plaintiff Robert Taylor was arrested in Philadelphia and charged with various offenses involving the possession of a firearm and making false statements to authorities.³ Commonwealth v. Taylor, Court Summary, No. CP-51-CR-009569-2010 at 5 (Ct. Com. Pl. Philadelphia, filed July 28, 2010). After a trial in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Plaintiff was found guilty and sentenced to 11 to 23 months' imprisonment, followed by five (5) years of probation. Commonwealth v. Taylor, Docket No. CP-51-CR-009569-2010 at 6-7 (Ct. Com. Pl. Philadelphia, filed July 28, 2010).

On November 16, 2015, Plaintiff was arrested and detained for violating his probation.⁴ (Doc. No. 10 at 3.) According to the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff was "unreasonably summonedto stop on the sidewalk by members of the Philadelphia police department," including Officer Obrien and another unnamed officer, but he contends that he "had not violated any laws precipitating this incident stop." (Doc. No. 10 at 3.) After the stop, Plaintiff claims that he was "subjected to unreasonable arrest and unreasonable search and seizure." (Id.) After being taken into custody, Plaintiff alleges that the police shuttled him back and forth between two different police stations, all the while keeping him handcuffed in the back seat of the squad car. He claims that he was "detained without charge or due process."⁵ (Id.)

The next day, Plaintiff was transported to the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility ("CFCF"), where he was detained pending the outcome of his violation of probation hearing. (Id.) According to the Amended Complaint, the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office hauled him back and forth from the CFCF to the Criminal Justice Center ("CJC") every 60 to 90 days, but the Court of Common Pleas did not hold any violation of probation proceedings until July 12, 2017, the day of his ultimate release. (Id. at 4.)

The Honorable Frank Palumbo, a judge in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Criminal Division, was assigned to preside over Plaintiff's violation of probation proceeding.Commonwealth v. Taylor, Docket No. CP-51-CR-009569-2010 at 5. Judge Palumbo continued the violation of probation hearing so that Plaintiff could undergo mental health and competency evaluations. Id. at 1-3. This occurred over the course of several hearings. Plaintiff remained incarcerated at the CFCF and the CJC during these proceedings. He claims that while at the CJC, he was subjected to harsh conditions, overcrowding, and inadequate food and drink. (Doc. No. 10 at 3-4.) Plaintiff's violation hearing ultimately took place on July 12, 2017, when he was finally released. (Id.) He claims that he was detained for about twenty-nine (29) months because Judge Palumbo, the Court of Common Pleas, the Defender Association, and...