Vincent v. Yelich

• Decision Date: 04 June 2013
• Docket Number: Docket Nos. 11–3893–pr, 11–3966–pr, 12–0439–pr.
• Citation: 718 F.3d 157
• Parties: Shawn Michael VINCENT, Jimmie Johnson, Seneca Robinson, Gary St. Mary, Walter Eades, Reginald Johnson, Donald McLean, Jeffrey Palmer, Wayne B. Wright, Jr., Shawn Goodman, David Waddell, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Bruce S. YELICH, Superintendent, Bare Hill Correctional Facility, in his official and unofficial capacity; Brian Fischer, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Anthony J. Annucci, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Executive Deputy Commissioner of and counsel to the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Richard deSimone, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Associate Counsel in Charge of the Office of Sentencing Review of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Lucien J. Leclaire, Jr., in his individual capacity; Glenn S. Goord, in his individual capacity; Henry Lemons, Jr., in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the New York State Division of Parole; George B. Alexander, in his individual capacity; Robert Dennison, in his individual capacity; Brion D. Travis, in his individual capacity; and John and Jane Does 1–50, various training, supervisory and policymaking employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services or the New York Division of Parole, in their individual capacities, Defendants–Appellees. Sean Earley, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Anthony J. Annucci, in his personal and official capacities as Executive Deputy Commissioner of and counsel to the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Brian Fischer, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, in his official capacity and his unofficial capacity; Richard deSimone, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Associate Counsel in Charge of the Office of Sentencing Review of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Lucien J. Leclaire, Jr., in his individual capacity; Glenn S. Goord, in his individual capacity; Henry Lemons, Jr., in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the New York State Division of Parole; George B. Alexander, in his individual capacity; Robert Dennison, in his individual capacity; Brion D. Travis, in his individual capacity; and John and Jane Does 1–50, various training, supervisory and policymaking employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services or the New York Division of Parole, in their individual capacities, Defendants–Appellees.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

718 F.3d 157

Shawn Michael VINCENT, Jimmie Johnson, Seneca Robinson, Gary St. Mary, Walter Eades, Reginald Johnson, Donald McLean, Jeffrey Palmer, Wayne B. Wright, Jr., Shawn Goodman, David Waddell, Plaintiffs–Appellants,

v.Bruce S. YELICH, Superintendent, Bare Hill Correctional Facility, in his official and unofficial capacity; Brian Fischer, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Anthony J. Annucci, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Executive Deputy Commissioner of and counsel to the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Richard deSimone, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Associate Counsel in Charge of the Office of Sentencing Review of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Lucien J. Leclaire, Jr., in his individual capacity; Glenn S. Goord, in his individual capacity; Henry Lemons, Jr., in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the New York State Division of Parole; George B. Alexander, in his individual capacity; Robert Dennison, in his individual capacity; Brion D. Travis, in his individual capacity; and John and Jane Does 1–50, various training, supervisory and policymaking employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services or the New York Division of Parole, in their individual capacities, Defendants–Appellees.

Sean Earley, Plaintiff–Appellant,

v.Anthony J. Annucci, in his personal and official capacities as Executive Deputy Commissioner of and counsel to the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Brian Fischer, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, in his official capacity and his unofficial capacity; Richard deSimone, in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Associate Counsel in Charge of the Office of Sentencing Review of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Lucien J. Leclaire, Jr., in his individual capacity; Glenn S. Goord, in his individual capacity; Henry Lemons, Jr., in his individual capacity and his official capacity as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the New York State Division of Parole; George B. Alexander, in his individual capacity; Robert Dennison, in his individual capacity; Brion D. Travis, in his individual capacity; and John and Jane Does 1–50, various training, supervisory and policymaking employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services or the New York Division of Parole, in their individual capacities, Defendants–Appellees.

Docket Nos. 11–3893–pr, 11–3966–pr, 12–0439–pr.

United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit.

Argued: Oct. 16, 2012.

Decided: June 4, 2013.

K. Wade Eaton, Rochester, New York (Matthew J. Fusco, Jon P. Getz, Gary Muldoon, Rochester, New York, on the brief), for Plaintiffs–Appellants.

Zainab A. Chaudhry, Assistant Solicitor General, Albany, New York (Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General of the State of New York, Barbara D. Underwood, Solicitor General, Andrea Oser, Deputy Solicitor General, Albany, New

York, on the brief), for Defendants–Appellees.

Before: KEARSE, KATZMANN, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

KEARSE, Circuit Judge:

Plaintiffs Shawn Michael Vincent and Jimmie Johnson et al., former New York State (“State”) prisoners who brought separate actions in the district court and whose appeals have been consolidated in this Court, appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, David G. Larimer, Judge, dismissing Vincent's second amended complaint (“complaint”) and Jimmie Johnson's amended complaint (“complaint”) (collectively the “Vincent/JJohnson complaints”) against officials and employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services (“DOCS”) and the New York State Division of Parole (“Parole Division” or “Division”) (collectively “DOCS and Parole officials”). The Vincent/JJohnson complaints, brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for damages and declaratory relief, alleged that defendants violated plaintiffs' due process rights as announced in Hill v. United States ex rel. Wampler, 298 U.S. 460, 56 S.Ct. 760, 80 L.Ed. 1283 (1936) (“Wampler ”), and described in Earley v. Murray, 451 F.3d 71 (2d Cir.) (“Earley I ”), reh'g denied,462 F.3d 147 (2d Cir.2006) (“Earley II ”), cert. denied,551 U.S. 1159, 127 S.Ct. 3014, 168 L.Ed.2d 752 (2007), by administratively imposing and enforcing conditions of supervision on plaintiffs following their release from prison, despite the absence of any order for such supervision by the courts that sentenced plaintiffs for their crimes. The district court granted defendants' motions to dismiss the Vincent/JJohnson complaints pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), ruling that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the unconstitutionality of the administrative imposition of such supervision was not clear prior to Earley I, and State cases decided after Earley I made it unclear that administrative imposition of such conditions was unconstitutional. Plaintiff Sean Earley, whose appeal was heard in tandem with those of Vincent and Jimmie Johnson, appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., Judge, granting summary judgment dismissing, also on the basis of qualified immunity, Earley's second amended complaint (“complaint”) asserting similar claims for damages against most of the same corrections and parole officials.

On appeal, plaintiffs contend principally that the defendant DOCS and Parole officials are not entitled to qualified immunity because Earley I determined that the rights asserted by plaintiffs had been sufficiently clearly established decades earlier by Wampler. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that Earley I, an appeal from the denial of habeas corpus, did not rule that those rights were clearly established by Wampler with respect to a defense of qualified immunity; but we conclude that Earley I itself, decided on June 9, 2006, did clearly establish the unconstitutionality of the administrative imposition or enforcement of postrelease conditions that were not judicially imposed. Accordingly, and for the reasons that follow, we vacate so much of the judgments of the district courts as dismissed claims that defendant Anthony J. Annucci, DOCS's Executive Deputy Commissioner and counsel, administratively imposed, enforced, or supervised employees who imposed or enforced, such conditions on any plaintiff after that date. We affirm the judgments to the extent that they dismissed plaintiffs' claims against the other defendants.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs are persons who were convicted of various New York State crimes committed on or after September 1, 1998, were sentenced to prison terms that they served, and were released from prison at various times between 2002 and mid–2007. It appears to be undisputed as to each plaintiff that, either during his term of imprisonment or upon his release from prison, he was informed that he was subject to postrelease supervision (“PRS”) conditions of which he had not been informed by the court and which were not stated in the written order of commitment. Most of the plaintiffs were reincarcerated following determinations that they had violated their PRS conditions. ( See Part II.D. below.)

The named defendants in each of the three complaints (collectively the “Complaints”) include five DOCS officials and four Parole Division officials. The defendant DOCS officials in addition to Annucci are identified as follows: Brian Fischer, Commissioner since January 1, 2007; Richard deSimone, Associate Counsel in Charge of the Office of Sentencing Review; Lucien J. Leclaire, Jr., former Acting Commissioner from August 30, 2006, to December 31, 2006; and Glenn S. Goord, former Commissioner from 1996 to August 30, 2006. The defendant Parole Division officials are identified as Henry Lemons, Jr., the Division's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since February 9, 2009, and three defendants who formerly held those positions: George B. Alexander from 2007 to 2009; Robert Dennison from 2003 to 2007; and Brion D. Travis from 1995 to 2003. The remaining named defendant, Bruce S. Yelich, as Superintendent of the Bare Hill Correctional Facility, is named only in the caption of the Vincent complaint and is nowhere mentioned in the body of the Complaints.

Although some of the defendants were originally sued in both their individual and official capacities, the official-capacity claims in the Vincent and Jimmie Johnson actions were withdrawn, leaving claims against them in those two actions only in their individual capacities.

A. Postrelease Supervision in New York

In 1998, the New York Legislature passed a sentencing reform act (or the “Act”)—commonly known as “Jenna's Law”—which, inter alia, established “a scheme of determinate sentencing” for violent felony offenders, eliminated parole for all such offenders, and required that determinate terms of imprisonment be followed by periods of mandatory postrelease supervision. People v. Catu, 4 N.Y.3d 242, 244, 792 N.Y.S.2d 887, 888, 825 N.E.2d 1081 (2005) (“Catu ”). The section of the Act at issue here provided in pertinent part that

[e]ach determinate sentence also includes, as a part thereof, an additional period of post-release supervision.... [A] violation of any condition of supervision occurring at any time during such period of post-release supervision shall subject the defendant to a further period of imprisonment of at least six months and up to the balance of the remaining period of post-release supervision, not to exceed five years.

1998 N.Y. Laws Ch. 1, § 15 (codified at N.Y. Penal Law § 70.45 [1] (McKinney 2004) (emphasis added)), amended by 2008 N.Y. Laws Ch. 141, § 3 (codified at N.Y. Penal Law § 70.45[1] (McKinney 2009) (requiring that the required PRS...