Sixth Circuit: Scott Callahan v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

Given precedent and legislative activity in the area, there is no Bivvens cause of action under the First Amendment for the seizure of an inmate's painting and mailed model photographs; the prison grievance procedures presumably offer sufficient remedy.

Scott Callahan v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

Eighth Circuit: United States v. Jeffrey Rodd

Since the District Court conceded that deft met the requirements for compassionate release, the only inquiry for review is whether there is sufficient indication in the record that the possibility of release was weighed against the sentencing court's justification for the sentence.

United States  v.  Jeffrey Rodd

Third Circuit: Michael Rinaldi v. USA

For purposes of the review of exhaustion of remedies, prison administrative remedies are considered unavailable where administrators dissuade the inmate using serious threats of retaliation and bodily harm.

To establish unavailaibility, the inmate must show that the remedy was objectively out of reach to the average inmate and that he or she was actually deterred from using it.

Where a prison modifies procedure and the highest authority formally denies on the merits, the administrative remedy has been exhausted.

Housing and cellmate assignments are left to the discretionary judgment of the administrators, which bars a tort claim against the government under the FTCA exception to sovereign immunity.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/161080p.pdf

Third Circuit: Joseph Brown v. Sage

When determining whether a prisoner's petition to proceed as a poor person is barred under statute due to having already filed three complaints that did not state a valid claim, the procedural law of the present forum controls, not the law of the forum in which the previous claims were filed. 

The number of previously filed complaints is determined by counting all claims resolved before the filing date of the present action.

Concur/dissent - the discretionary power of dismissal in the PLSRA is a more efficient mechanism, and the analysis mandated here seems to foreclose that flexibility.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171222p.pdf

Ninth Circuit: Lucero v. Holland

Apparently incriminating gang writings insufficiently testimonial to trigger Confrontation Clause protections when introduced against a nontestifying codefendant.

Expert testimony that gang member was to have access to a weapon at all times and proximity to assault with a puncturing weapon insufficient to establish possession of a weapon.

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/31/15-16111.pdf

First Circuit: Perry v. Spencer

Qualified immunity for prison officials in suit challenging placement of inmate in segregation cells, as it was unclear at which point the due process interest arose, and safety concerns allow prison officials considerable discretion in scheduling adversarial challenges to administrative decisions.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/16-2444U-01A.pdf

Seventh Circuit: Alfredo Miranda v. County of Lake

14th Amendment and negligence claims against jail physicians for the self-starvation and dehydration death of a non-citizen arrested for evading jury service present an issue for trial when the jury might reasonably decide that the denial of treatment was objectively unreasonable.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-10/C:17-1603:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:2200463:S:0

Eighth Circuit: Daaron McAdoo v. Amy Martin

Statute's requirement of physical injury is a threshold requirement to bar frivolous claims, so causation does not have to be established between the injury and the evil of the statute -- plaintiff can recover for any harms traceable to unconstitutional deliberate indifference so long as there is an injury associated with the claim.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171952P.pdf

Ninth Circuit: Shorter v. Baca

Plaintiff's separate challenge to a jury instruction requiring deference to jail's policies sufficiently preserved a more general challenge to the instruction.

Juries should be instructed to give deference to jail's policies only where the treatment is a necessary, justified, and proportional security-based policy.

Absent any security-based reason, deference to the policy should be denied as a matter of law.

Pretrial detainees are entitled to a grievance procedure upon changes in their classification that increases the severity of the conditions of confinement.

Deliberate indifference claims arising from medical treatment should be judged under a standard of objective deliberate indifference.

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/16/16-56051.pdf

Seventh Circuit: Roy Mitchell, Jr. v. Kevin Kallas

There is a genuine issue for trial where a sufficiently controlling prison physician completely denies treatment for gender issues due to the short time remaining in sentence.  Where parole conditions do not preclude such treatment, allegations that parole officers blocked treatment for gender issues presents an issue for trial.  Where disparate theories of harm arising from both incarceration and post-release restrictions have a common factual basis, a single action is permissible under statute.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-10/C:16-3350:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:2184144:S:0

Seventh Circuit: Jon Giles v. Gabrielle Tobeck

The actions of a prison guard who mistakenly unlocked a section of cells and negligently relied on an inmate to voluntarily return to a cell unescorted did not rise to the level of deliberate indifference vis-a-vis the subsequent fisticuffs.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-10/C:17-1707:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:fnOp:N:2184277:S:0

Tenth Circuit: Lamb v. Norwood

Absent case-specific medical findings, a prisoner's assertion of medical necessity of gender transition does not present a genuine issue of deliberate indifference for trial. 

Petitioner did no have standing to challenge the preliminary investigative report or to supplement it, as its conclusions could be rebutted in the motions for and against summary judgment.

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-3171.pdf

Seventh Circuit: Maurice Wallace v. John Baldwin

Solitary confinement for eleven years, combined with suicidal behavior, presents sufficient showing of imminent danger to allow a prisoner to advance a claim for relief without paying the fees.   The "three strikes" assessed under the statute to the contrary are, in fact, only two, due to legal error.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-09/C:17-2427:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:2183310:S:0

Second Circuit: Williams v. Annucci

Since the statute contemplates increased costs in compliance, simple assertion of the costs of compliance is an insufficiently particular compelling government interest to justify summary judgment.  Government's refusal to accommodate inmate's sincerely held religious beliefs in the provision of meals has not been demonstrated to be the least restrictive means.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/1/doc/15-1018_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/1/hilite/

Fifth Circuit: John Uranga, III v. Lorie Davis, Director

Postjudgment motion following denial of Habeas was not a second or successive Habeas filing, as it was a timely challenge of denial of leave to amend.

Fellow prisoner's delivery and signature sufficed for the prison mailbox rule under the next friend doctrine, as the justifying circumstances were disclosed.

Juror was not biased as a matter of law under the implied bias doctrine when it emerged at trial that the deft had driven over and damaged his lawn while fleeing from authorities.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-10290-CV1.pdf

Third Circuit: Gregory Ricks v. D. Shover

In prisons, abuse of a sexual nature, either in single instances or in a pattern of conduct, can present an Eighth Amendment violation, but courts should not constitutionalize every malevolent touch.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/162939p.pdf

Eleventh Circuit: USA v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

Religion, Prisons


Under federal statute, assertion of cost burden is insufficient basis for state's refusal to provide kosher meals to prisoners who hold the requisite sincere religious belief.


USA v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

Fifth Circuit: Clarence Brown v. Allison Taylor, et al

Prisons, FRCP


Prisoner mailbox rule is potentially applicable in cases of civil confinement.

Sua sponte dismissal of pro se claim without notice or opportunity to amend was error.


Clarence Brown v. Allison Taylor, et al

Second Circuit: Williams v. Correction Officer Priatno

S1983, Administrative, PLSRA


Claim was properly administratively exhausted, as there was no procedure for appealing a grievance that had been improperly not filed.


Williams v. Correction Officer Priatno

Seventh Circuit: Melvin Phillips v. Sheriff of Cook County

S1983, Prisons, Class Actions, FRCP


Prisoner claims asserting deliberate indifference under S1983 were improperly certified into a class, since although they shared an essential claim, the question of commonality implies a consideration of redressibility, and the relief sought in individual claims did not always support the remedy sought on behalf of the class as a whole.

Motion for relief from final judgment was inappropriate to challenge denial of certification -- an amended motion to certify the class remained available, appealable if a subsequent decision of the court materially alters the position of the class.



Melvin Phillips v.   Sheriff of Cook County