Brown v. Maricopa, County of

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedAugust 21, 2024
Docket2:24-cv-01942
StatusUnknown

This text of Brown v. Maricopa, County of (Brown v. Maricopa, County of) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brown v. Maricopa, County of, (D. Ariz. 2024).

Opinion

1 MDR 2 WO 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Jerry Douglas Harris Brown, Jr., No. CV-24-01942-PHX-JAT (MTM) 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER 12 Maricopa County, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 Self-represented Plaintiff Jerry Douglas Harris Brown, Jr., who is confined in a 16 Maricopa County Jail, filed a civil rights Complaint1 (Doc. 1) and an Application to 17 Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). The Court will grant the Application to Proceed and 18 will dismiss the Complaint with leave to amend. 19 I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee 20 The Court will grant Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. 28 21 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff must pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00. 28 U.S.C. 22 § 1915(b)(1). The Court will not assess an initial partial filing fee. Id. The statutory filing 23 fee will be collected monthly in payments of 20% of the previous month’s income credited 24 to Plaintiff’s trust account each time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. 25 26 1 Plaintiff alleges the Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Because Plaintiff is 27 only suing state actors, the Court will construe Plaintiff’s claims as having been asserted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Martin v. Sias, 88 F.3d 774, 775 (9th Cir. 1996) 28 (“Actions under § 1983 and those under Bivens are identical save for the replacement of a state actor under § 1983 by a federal actor under Bivens.” (quoting Van Strum v. Lawn, 940 F.2d 406, 409 (9th Cir. 1991))). 1 § 1915(b)(2). The Court will enter a separate Order requiring the appropriate government 2 agency to collect and forward the fees according to the statutory formula. 3 II. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints 4 The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief 5 against a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 6 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff 7 has raised claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which 8 relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from 9 such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1)–(2). 10 A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 11 pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does 12 not demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the- 13 defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 14 (2009). “Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 15 conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Id. 16 “[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a 17 claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 18 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content 19 that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the 20 misconduct alleged.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for 21 relief [is] . . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial 22 experience and common sense.” Id. at 679. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual 23 allegations may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there 24 are other “more likely explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 681. 25 But as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has instructed, courts 26 must “continue to construe [self-represented litigant’s] filings liberally.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 27 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010). A “complaint [filed by a self-represented prisoner] 28 1 ‘must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.’” Id. 2 (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)). 3 If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other 4 facts, a self-represented litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint before 5 dismissal of the action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en 6 banc). The Court will dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave 7 to amend because it may possibly be amended to state a claim. 8 III. Complaint 9 In his two-count Complaint, Plaintiff names as Defendants Maricopa County, 10 Maricopa County Sheriff Russell Skinner, Acting Jail Commander Patrick King, and Jail 11 Officials/Detention Officers John/Jane Does 1-15. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages, 12 “[a]ny and all complaints within MCSO dismissed with prejudice,” and two one-way, first- 13 class tickets on American Airlines to Guam “upon [his] release.” 14 In Count One, Plaintiff raises a claim under the Eighth and Fourteenth 15 Amendments regarding the implementation of an “unconstitutional policy.” Plaintiff 16 contends he filed a grievance and received a response that his complaint “was no longer 17 valid after 72 hours.” Plaintiff seeks to have Defendant Maricopa County, “in its entirety,” 18 held “responsible for implementing this unconstitutional policy that depriv[ed him] of [his] 19 constitutional rights.” 20 In Count Two, Plaintiff raises a claim under the Fourteenth Amendment regarding 21 the implementation of an “unconstitutional policy.” He alleges that for a five-day period 22 in May, “MCSO Jail Officials” allowed food that was “in shockingly despicable 23 conditions” to be served to approximately 71 detainees, including Plaintiff. Plaintiff 24 contends the food was “exposed to human feces and urine and sewer water” that “they” 25 had Plaintiff and other detainees clean up. He asserts they were “ordered to do this” but 26 were “then told on other days to line up for breakfast at [their] housing unit entrance.” 27 Plaintiff claims this was “rare” and “shows that the officer knew and was uncomfortable 28 under the current conditions.” He asserts that “to do this,” the detainees “had to stand in 1 human fe[]ces and human crap[] water . . . to receive [their] meals.” Plaintiff contends the 2 responsible officers “had far enough warning and did nothing for [the detainees].” He 3 alleges he only ate food he had purchased from the commissary because he feared his food 4 would be contaminated. Plaintiff claims he is “traumatized” and “unable to trust that [his] 5 food or anything else here is not contaminated.” 6 IV.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rizzo v. Goode
423 U.S. 362 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.
436 U.S. 658 (Supreme Court, 1978)
Bell v. Wolfish
441 U.S. 520 (Supreme Court, 1979)
Daniels v. Williams
474 U.S. 327 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Hebbe v. Pliler
627 F.3d 338 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Ivey v. Board of Regents of University of Alaska
673 F.2d 266 (Second Circuit, 1982)
Carol Van Strum Paul E. Merrell v. John C. Lawn
940 F.2d 406 (Ninth Circuit, 1991)
Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
963 F.2d 1258 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
Dennis Hamilton v. Roger v. Endell
981 F.2d 1062 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Brown v. Maricopa, County of, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-maricopa-county-of-azd-2024.