Wilson v. Parkison
| Decision Date | 02 November 2022 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL 3:21-cv-03069-TLB-MEF |
| Parties | THOMAS RAY DARYL WILSON PLAINTIFF v. CORPORAL ALEXANDRIA PARKISON, Boone County Detention Center BCDC; CORPORAL JAMES KELLEY, BCDC; SERGEANT SHAWN HARP, BCDC; and JAILER WATHA HONEYMAN, BCDC DEFENDANTS |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Thomas Ray Daryl Wilson (“Wilson”), filed this pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Wilson proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis.
While he was detained in the Boone County Detention Center (“BCDC”), Wilson contends his constitutional rights were violated in the following ways: (1) he was denied legal copies by Corporal Parkison, thus preventing his access to the court; (2) he was retaliated against by Corporal Parkison; (3) excessive force was used against him by Sergeant Harp and Corporal Kelley; and (4), he was denied due process by Corporal Honeyman in connection with his lockdown and disciplinary hearing.
Before the Court is the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment filed on March 25, 2022. (ECF Nos. 45-47). Wilson responded to the motion on August 3, 2022.[1](ECF No.88).
On August 11, 2022, Defendants filed a Reply in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 89) and Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 90), which offered additional argument in reply to Plaintiff's response. Defendants also filed a supplement, the Affidavit of Jason Day (Jail Administrator) on August 15, 2022. (ECF No. 91). Plaintiff filed a sur-reply on September 21, 2022. (ECF No 94). Defendants filed another supplement on September 26 2022. (ECF No. 96). The Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is ripe for decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and (3) (2011), the Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge, referred this case to the undersigned for the purpose of making this Report and Recommendation on the Motion for Summary Judgment.
According to Wilson, on August 12, 2021, he was in the dayroom of C-pod when Corporal Parkison was doing her walk through. (ECF No. 2 at 4). Wilson informed her that he had been approved by D. Everhart for legal copies two days earlier but had not yet received the copies. Id. Wilson asked Corporal Parkison if she could make the copies for him. Id. This is the point where the stories of the parties begin to diverge.
Wilson says Corporal Parkison replied that he would have to wait and have D. Everhart make the copies. (ECF No. 2 at 4; ECF No. 88 at 3). Wilson indicates he had the legal papers in his hand. (ECF No. 88 at 24). Wilson denies he used any insolent or profane language when speaking to Corporal Parkison. Id. at 3.[2] He informed Corporal Parkison that he was going to file a grievance. (ECF No. 2 at 4).
A short time later, Sergeant Harp, Corporal Kelley, and Corporal Parkison returned to C-pod. (ECF No. 2 at 5). Sergeant Harp “aggressively marched up the stairs to where I was standing, which was in the doorway of C-6.” Id. Sergeant Harp then “used excessive force with his belly and chest to shove me from the door way to the wall in C-6 and pinned me in place.” Id. Wilson alleges Sergeant Harp said: “Please do something so help me God I'll lose my job.” Id. at 5. Wilson was ordered to lock-down for the rest of the night in C-8 and complied. Id. Wilson was in his cell venting when Sergeant Harp called him a “punk bitch,” and “reopened C-8's door to continue to aggressively assault me in C-8 with his belly and chest.” Id. Wilson was handcuffed by Corporal Kelley and Sergeant Harp. (ECF No. 2 at 3; ECF No. 88 at 25). Corporal Kelley put Wilson on 24-hour notice that there would be a disciplinary hearing. (ECF No. 2 at 2).
Wilson had a disciplinary hearing the following day. (ECF No. 2 at 5). Corporal Honeyman acted as the hearing officer. Id. Wilson maintains this was in direct violation of BCDC's policy which required the hearing officer to be of a higher rank than a jailer.[3]Id. Wilson was placed on indefinite punitive segregation with a review every two weeks. Id.
According to Corporal Parkison, at approximately 7:28 p.m., Wilson asked her if she would access his property and make copies of paperwork he had there. (ECF No. 45-1 at 1, 4). Wilson indicated Officer Everhart, who worked the day shift, told Wilson he could do it. Id. at 2. Corporal Parkison advised Wilson she was not authorized to access his property, and that he needed to talk to Officer Everhart in the morning and have him do it.[4] Id. Corporal Parkison states that “[a]t this point, Wilson became very agitated, cussing me, calling me a ‘f liar' and stating that I was ‘violating his Constitutional f------ rights.” Id. Wilson then stated he was going to file a grievance on Corporal Parkison. Id.
When Corporal Parkison advised Corporal Kelley and Sergeant Harp of the incident, the three of them went to C-pod at approximately 7:45 p.m. (ECF No. 45-1 at 2). According to Corporal Parkison, Wilson again called her a liar, began cussing, and became agitated. Id. at 4. As a result, Corporal Parkison indicates that: Corporal Parkison maintains it was necessary to lock Wilson down for the safety of the officers and inmates. Id. at 2.
Corporal Kelley indicates that he and Sergeant Harp went to [5]” (ECF No. 45-2 at 1). Corporal Kelley did not see Sergeant Harp use any force against Wilson. Id. Instead, Corporal Kelley indicates this is what occurred:
Wilson was attempting to move out of his cell to go around Harp to talk to Parkison. Harp placed his body in front of him and moved along with him to stop him from being able to get around to Parkison. That was for Parkison's safety and the safety of the facility. Eventually, as Wilson continued to be agitated, I placed him in handcuffs and escorted him to booking so that he could calm down. Around [7:52 p.m.], I brought him back to his pod for the night.
Id. at 1-2.[6]
Likewise, Sergeant Harp merely indicates he placed his body in front of Wilson to keep him from going around him to talk to Parkison. (ECF No. 45-4 at 2). Sergeant Harp asserts he did not place his hands on Wilson or use force against him. Id. Sergeant Harp also asserts that Wilson was not visibly injured, reported no injuries, and did not ask to see medical personnel. Id.
Corporal Parkison attended the disciplinary hearing. (ECF No. 45-1 at 2). Corporal Honeyman acted as the hearing officer. (ECF No. 45-5 at 3). Wilson was charged with: (1) lying or providing a false statement to an officer or staff member; (2) conduct which disrupts or interferes with the security and/or orderly running of the detention facility; (3) insolence or disrespect toward a staff member; and (4), using abusive, indecent, or obscene language. Id. The disciplinary incident report indicates that Sergeant Harp and Corporal Parkison appeared at the hearing and there was also video evidence available.[7]Wilson was found guilty and put on an indefinite lockdown with two-week review. Id. at 3. Corporal Honeyman indicates Wilson's lock-down was ended early because he apologized for his behavior.[8]Id. at 1.
With respect to the grievance procedure, the inmate rules provide as follows:
P) Inmate/Detainee Grievances-Grievance forms are available upon request. Any inmate/detainee wishing to file a grievance should make the grievance brief and direct and addressed to appropriate personnel. All grievances shall be turned in to the on duty Detention officer and [illegible][9]. . . Jail Administrator. A copy of the response will be given to the issuing Inmate/Detainee. The original shall be kept on file.
The grievance policy provides that inmates may obtain a grievance form from any detention officer. (ECF No. 45-10 at 2, 4). With respect to substance, the policy provides: “The detainee must clearly describe all facts all request[s], then give grievance to any Detention Officer.” Id. at 2. Emergency grievances are to receive immediate attention. Id. Nonemergency grievances will be “investigated and if valid, resolved within a reasonable amount of time.” Id. Whether or not the grievance is found to have merit, “the grievant is informed of the disposition of the grievance, in writing, within ten (10) working days of the date the grievance was received.” Id. The “grievant may appeal any response or lack of response to the Sheriff or Jail Administrator who shall respond in writing.” Id. at 3. The policy also prohibits retaliation based on the filing of a grievance. Id. Specifically, the policy provides: Id.
The detainee discipline policy places offenses into four separate categories. (ECF No. 458 at 1). Category I offenses are the most severe and can result in indefinite segregation criminal charges, and loss of all privileges. Id. Category II offenses can result in segregation of 14 days, no privileges during segregation, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial