United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Paducah Division
BRANDON R. BRUIN PLAINTIFF
v.
WARDEN RANDY WHITE et al. DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Greg
N. Stivers, Judge United States District Court
Plaintiff
Brandon R. Bruin, a convicted prisoner at the Kentucky State
Penitentiary (KSP), filed a pro se complaint (DN 1)
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint is before
the Court for preliminary review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915A. For the reasons that follow, a portion of the claims
will be dismissed, and a portion of the claims will continue.
I.
Plaintiff
brings this action against the following KSP officers and
employees in their individual and official capacities: Warden
Randy White; Grievance Coordinator Dan Smith; Unit
Administrators Roger Mitchell, Bruce Von Dewingelo, and Jill
Roberts; Sergeant James R. Beeler; Case Treatment Officer
Micah Melton; and Corrections Officers James Smith and
Charles Crick.
Plaintiff
alleges that upon transfer to KSP on April 7, 2016, he
advised KSP officers that he is a “‘proclaimed
Rastafarian, and the Locks upon my head were apart of my
religious Beliefs.'” He reports that he had a
state-court order prohibiting the grooming of his head and
that on April 11, 2016, KSP non-Defendant Unit Administrator
Shea Carlson “informed me I was permitted to continue
my religious practice and if I inherited any problems, to
direct my opposers to her.” He reports that
non-Defendant Carlson also sent an email to “all Unit
Supervisors to refrain from grooming” him.
According
to Plaintiff, when KSP officers had wanted to cut his hair,
he referred them to the orders and memo prohibiting the
cutting of his hair and the officers would manually search
his hair for contraband. Plaintiff reports that around April
12, 2016, he asked Defendant Melton to allow him to have a
copy of the memorandum permitting him to retain his locks
“because I felt uncomfortable with how officers were
molesting and using derogatory and Bigotry statements toward
my religious practices and Beliefs. Cto; Melton laughed and
replied ‘Technically by [or] plicy [w] can cut
it” (alterations by Plaintiff). Plaintiff reports that
he was not provided with a copy of the memorandum.
As a
protection from removal of his hair, Plaintiff states that in
early May 2015, he filed a grievance asking KSP “to
cease the grooming of proclaimed Rastararians hair, and in
addition . . . to have possession of written
authorization.” On May 16, 2016, Defendant Dan Smith
denied Plaintiff's informal grievance, and Plaintiff was
permitted to appeal directly to the Commissioner.
Plaintiff
indicates that on May 26, 2016, he was transferred to the
“‘Super Maximum' housing unit.” He
alleges that on May 27, 2016, around 7:15 a.m., Defendants
Crick, Mitchell, James Smith, and Beeler “approached
Plaintiff's door, with a grievance allegedly Plaintiff
filed, which allegedly gave authorization by KDOC
Commissioner to cut Plaintiff's hair/locks.”
Plaintiff was ordered to remove the dreadlocks from his head,
but Plaintiff advised Defendants that “Manually they
(locks) do not come down or out, So their request wasn't
feasible because I could not get possession of a comb, razor
or clippers.” Plaintiff reports telling Defendants
about the court order and memo prohibiting the grooming his
dreadlocks and indicates that Defendants Beeler and Mitchell
left to review the information and to contact Defendant
White. Plaintiff alleges that later in the day at around
11:14 a.m.,
[D]efendant(s) returned in mask and equiped with football
like attire and x26 tasers. Defendant Beeler stated along
with defendant Mitchell's Eloquence that defendant, White
said “Cut it no excuses.” Plaintiff was
restrained by the use of force into a restraint chair at
which time Plaintiff asked defendant(s) Mitchell, Smith,
Crick and Beeler: “did the want to Search his head in
relation to CPP 9.8 Search Policy. All relevent defendant(s)
at this time cut Plaintiff's locks Perfidy to
Constitutional rights, Corrections Policy and Procedures and
on Honorable Court Order.
Plaintiff
states that following the Defendants' cutting of his
dreadlocks, he “noticed defendant Beeler possessed the
locks in a garbage bag alone” and that when he
“requested the locks be sent home to honor the covenant
Separation to the lord, Beeler states: ‘These
contraband around her Boy, ' with a sacastic grin,
displaying no scruple and volumes of Bigotry and
Solecism.” Plaintiff reports filing a few grievances
following the cutting of his dreadlocks, which Defendant Dan
Smith rejected.
Plaintiff
alleges several constitutional violations arising out of the
cutting of his dreadlocks and failure to send them home,
including a violation of the First Amendment Free Exercise
Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process and Equal
Protection Clauses.
Plaintiff
additionally alleges an Eighth Amendment violation by
Defendants White, Von Dewingelo, Roberts, and Melton for
failing to protect him from an assault by another inmate on
June 11, 2016. Plaintiff claims that Defendant Dan Smith
rejected his grievance filed regarding this matter.
As
relief, Plaintiff seeks damages and injunctive relief
“to cease the Unlawful grooming of ...