United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Northern Division
J. JONKER CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
a civil rights action brought by a state prisoner under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act,
Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996) (PLRA), the Court
is required to dismiss any prisoner action brought under
federal law if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks
monetary relief from a defendant immune from such relief. 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A; 42 U.S.C. §
1997e(c). The Court must read Plaintiff's pro se
complaint indulgently, see Haines v. Kerner, 404
U.S. 519, 520 (1972), and accept Plaintiff's allegations
as true, unless they are clearly irrational or wholly
incredible. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33
(1992). Applying these standards, the Court will dismiss
Plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim
against Defendants Wallis and McLean. The Court will also
dismiss, for failure to state a claim, Plaintiff's
procedural due process claims against Defendants Harrison,
Plumm, Spiker, and Horton.
is presently incarcerated with the Michigan Department of
Corrections (MDOC) at the Chippewa Correctional Facility
(URF) in Kincheloe, Chippewa County, Michigan. The events
about which he complains occurred at that facility. Plaintiff
sues Warden Connie Horton, Resident Unit Manager T. Corey
Spiker, Corrections Officer Unknown Harrison, Corrections
Officer Unknown Wallis, Prison Counselor Unknown Plumm, and
Grievance Coordinator Unknown McLean.
alleges that on November 26, 2018, he was released from
segregation to Level IV general population. Upon entering
Round Unit, Plaintiff overheard Defendant Harrison tell
another Corrections Officer that Plaintiff had a lot of
property and that he was going to “take some big
time.” Defendant Harrison subsequently ordered
Plaintiff to unpack all his property and then repack it.
After Plaintiff complied, Defendant Harrison stated that it
was amazing how much property fit in a duffel bag, but he
still wanted to take some of Plaintiff's property.
Defendant Harrison then instructed Plaintiff to place his
typewriter in his duffel bag. Plaintiff refused, citing
Policy Directive 04.07.112, which provides that typewriters
shall be packed separately in an appropriate container with
adequate packing materials. Defendant Harrison then told
Plaintiff to have a seat because he was going to send him
back to segregation.
time later, Defendant Harrison called a Sergeant.
Plaintiff's hands were cuffed behind his back and he was
told that he was going to the hole for disobeying a direct
order. As they were approaching the exit, Defendant Harrison
grabbed Plaintiff from behind and slammed his head into the
metal door frame. Defendant Harrison stated:
You black mothaf#ckas don't run shit at this facility.
This is URF, which means you are fucked. Black people
don't have shi#t coming up here. For that you won't
get any of your f#cking property.
(See Compl., ECF No. 1, PageID.8.)
was placed in segregation and received a Class II misconduct.
Plaintiff received a contraband removal slip created by
Defendant Wallis, which listed property items that were
considered excess and had been confiscated. The contraband
removal slip did not include Plaintiff's television,
typewriter, or footlocker. Nor did it include Defendant
Wallis' printed name, signature, badge number, or date.
Therefore, the contraband removal slip was incomplete and
November 27, 2018, Plaintiff filed a grievance on Defendant
Harrison for excessive force. On November 30, 2018, Plaintiff
filed a grievance regarding the improper seizure of his
property. Plaintiff was released from segregation on December
9, 2018, and returned to Round Unit. Upon entering the unit,
Plaintiff looked in the open equipment closet and saw a
plastic garbage bag containing property along with his
typewriter and television.
the administrative hearing on December 11, 2018, the list was
amended to include Plaintiff's television and typewriter.
Defendant Plumm showed Plaintiff the amended contraband
removal slip while reviewing Plaintiff's November 30,
2018, grievance with him. The amended slip was signed by
Defendant Harrison. Plaintiff's television and typewriter
were stored in an unsecured equipment closet. Plaintiff asked
Defendant Plumm why he had not been given the opportunity to
exchange a packed allowable item with either his television
or typewriter in accordance with Policy Directive 04.07.112
¶ EE. Defendant Plumm told Plaintiff that he did not
have anything coming because he had filed grievances on
Plumm subsequently gave Plaintiff his typewriter, but told
Plaintiff that his television was excess property and had to
be destroyed. Defendant Plumm also stated that he was going
to hold on to Plaintiff's footlocker. When Plaintiff
questioned these actions, Defendant Plumm stated,
“Because I want to, this is what happens when you write
grievances on staff in Round Unit.” (Compl., ECF No. 1
at PageID.11.) As Plaintiff was leaving Defendant Plumm's
office, he stated, “Don't worry about your tv, you
will never see it again. You black assholes run around in
gangs thinking you run something. You don't run shit here
at URF.” Plaintiff told Defendant Plumm that he was
going to file a grievance and Defendant Plumm stated,
“That is why you are not getting the tv back, you think
you're smarter than us. No crack baby is smarter than
us.” Defendant Plumm asked Plaintiff if he really
believed that “she” would go against URF staff,
and noted that “she” hated “niggers”
even more that Defendant Plumm. (Id. at
PageID.11-12.) Plaintiff filed a grievance on Defendant
Plumm. Later that evening, Corrections Officer Mehan returned
Plaintiff's footlocker to him.
December 18, 2018, Plaintiff wrote another grievance
regarding the seizure of his television. However, the
grievance was rejected by Defendant McLean. On December 19,
2018, Plaintiff's cell was ransacked by corrections
officers while Plaintiff was at chow. Plaintiff discovered
that all of the paperwork he had completed regarding this
lawsuit had been torn up and was in the toilet. When
Plaintiff asked officers why they had ransacked his cell,
they told him that until he learned how things worked at URF,
he would continue to have problems with staff. On ...