United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division
HOLMES, III, CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
case is before the Court for preservice screening under the
provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court has the
obligation to screen any complaint in which a prisoner seeks
redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of
a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
filed his Complaint on October 2, 2017. (ECF No. 1). He
alleges his constitutional rights are being violated by
unconstitutional conditions of confinement in the Logan
County Detention Center. (ECF No. 1, p. 4). Specifically, he
alleges there is an ongoing lockdown which requires inmates
to eat and defecate in the same cell, there are no tables, no
windows, and no natural light. (Id.) He further
alleges there are no windows on the doors, no ladders to
climb up and down from bunks, there is segregation of
inmates, and misdemeanor inmates are housed with felony
inmates. (Id.) He further alleges the outside yard
has no urinal or running water, and inmates urinate in the
corner of the yard. (Id.) He alleges there is no
bench to sit on in the outside yard, no pull-up bar for
exercise, no dayroom, and inmates are not let out of their
cells for 23 hours at a time. (Id.) He alleges he
saw another misdemeanor inmate be assaulted, so he does not
feel safe in the facility. (Id.)
proceeds against all Defendants in their official and
personal capacities. (ECF No. 1 at 5). Plaintiff seeks
compensatory and punitive damages. (ECF No. 1 at 11).
the PLRA, the Court is obligated to screen the case prior to
service of process being issued. The Court must dismiss a
complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that:
(1) are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted; or, (2) seeks monetary relief
from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.
is frivolous if “it lacks an arguable basis either in
law or fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319, 325 (1989). A claim fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted if it does not allege “enough
facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 570 (2007). “In evaluating whether a pro
se plaintiff has asserted sufficient facts to state a
claim, we hold ‘a pro se complaint, however
inartfully pleaded ... to less stringent standards than
formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.'” Jackson
v. Nixon, 747 F.3d 537, 541 (8th Cir. 2014) (quoting
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)). Even a
pro se Plaintiff must allege specific facts
sufficient to support a claim. Martin v. Sargent,
780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8 Cir. 1985).
has failed to state a plausible claim of unconstitutional
conditions of confinement. “[W]hen the State takes a
person into its custody and holds him there against his will,
the Constitution imposes upon it a corresponding duty to
assume some responsibility for his safety and general
well-being.” County of Sacramento v. Lewis,
523 U.S. 833 (1998) (citation omitted). The Eighth Amendment
to the United States Constitution prohibits the imposition of
cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. Const. amend. VIII.
Detention centers must provide pretrial detainees with
“reasonably adequate sanitation, personal hygiene, and
laundry privileges . . . .” Beaulieu v.
690 F.3d 1017, 1045 (8th Cir. 2012) (quoting Howard v.
Adkison, 887 F.2d 134, 137 (8th Cir. 1989)). The Eighth
Amendment also prohibits punishments that deprive inmates of
the minimal civilized measure of life's necessities.
Smith v. Copeland, 87 F.3d 265, 268 (8th Cir. 1996);
see also Hall v. Dalton, 34 F.3d 648, 650 (8th Cir.
1994) (“[I]n this circuit, the standards applied to
Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment claims have been
the case with all Eighth Amendment claims, a prisoner must
suffer some actual injury in order to receive compensation.
This injury must be greater than de minimis.
Irving v. Dormire, 519 F.3d 441, 448 (8th Cir.
2008). Plaintiff seeks compensation, but has provided no
allegation of actual injury suffered as a result of any of
the alleged conditions at the Logan County Detention Center.
Plaintiff, therefore, failed to state a plausible conditions
of confinement claim.
these reasons, Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED ...