Ivester v. Sweeny

1

MICHAEL IVESTER, Plaintiff, v. DONNA SWEENY et al., Defendant.

Civ. No. 19-16559 (FLW) (DEA)

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

December 16, 2022

OPINION

FREDA L. WOLFSON, U.S. Chief District Judge.

Plaintiff Michael Ivester (“Ivester” or “Plaintiff”), is proceeding pro se with an Amended Complaint asserting violations of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons explained herein, the Court dismisses the Amended Complaint in its entirety pursuant to its screening authority under 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B).

I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

a. The Amended Complaint

Ivester alleges that he is an Oregon resident serving a sentence imposed by the courts of the State of Oregon, but he is presently incarcerated at New Jersey State Prison (“NJSP”), in Trenton, New Jersey, under the Interstate Corrections Compact (“ICC”). See ECF No. 7, Amended Complaint (“Am. Compl.”) at 2-3. Plaintiff has sued Defendants in New Jersey, Oregon, and Iowa in connection with his efforts to challenge his Iowa conviction, which was entered on or about December 3, 2015. See generally, Am. Compl.

Plaintiff alleges that although he has been transferred to prisons in different states, he has been serving an Oregon state sentence throughout the relevant time periods set forth in his Amended Complaint. Am. Compl. at 11. In November 2014, Ivester was transferred from Oregon to a facility in Iowa, the Iowa Medical and Classification Center (“IMCC”). Id. at 14. Ivester alleges that in November 2014 he “was accused of assaulting an inmate and a staff member at the IMCC” and that he “was kept in solitary for approximately fif[]teen months while awaiting the final disposition of his pending felony charges.” See id. Ivester contends that while he was in solitary confinement, Greg Ort, Acting Deputy Warden at IMCC, directed corrections officers to abuse and harass Plaintiff. Id. The abuse included name-calling, placing Plaintiff on strip cell status, confiscating Plaintiff's legal materials and clothes, denying Plaintiff, use of the law library for research, denying telephone privileges, and destroying his incoming mail. Id. at 15. Defendant Ort allegedly instructed his subordinates to confiscate Plaintiff's legal work and research related to the felony charges in Iowa, and Plaintiff was unable to communicate with attorney, and thus was unable to formulate a defense to the felony charges. Id. at 15-16.

Plaintiff was convicted of the Iowa charges and was sentenced on December 3, 2015. Am. Compl. at 14, 16. Plaintiff alleges he was “unexpectedly” transferred to NJSP 80 days after his sentencing on the Iowa charges. Id. at 14, 16, 17.

Plaintiff received a twenty-five year sentence on the Iowa charges. See id. at 16. Plaintiff alleges that he would have received a lower sentence if he had the ability to conduct legal research prior to and during his trial. Id. Plaintiff also alleges that he made “numerous requests” to Greg Ort to appeal his Iowa sentence, but Ort would not let him contact his public defender, conduct legal research, or provide him with the addresses of the court that imposed the Iowa sentence. Id. Ort also allegedly instructed segregation housing officers not to provide Plaintiff with paper or writing materials or his property, including legal materials. In the days following his sentencing, Plaintiff

made numerous written and verbal requests to [Deputy Warden] Greg Ort pleading for the opportunity to contact his public defender, pleading for legal work containing the sentencing court[']s address and pleading for access to Iowa state law, case law, forms and other related materials, and on every occasion Greg Ort laughed at the plaintiff and told him “fuck you” and “go fuck yourself.” Greg Ort told the plaintiff he would “never get shit.”

Id. at 16. Plaintiff alleges in his Amended Complaint that he intended to appeal his conviction based on interference with his communication with his attorney and based on his inability to possess his own legal work, which prevented him from formulating his defense.^[1]Id. at 17.

Ivester recounts that, after he was transferred to NJSP on or about February 20, 2016, he began what he calls “a fruitless journey to gain access to Iowa state law and research assistance with Iowa state law.” Id. at 17. Plaintiff contends he was denied “procedural protections” guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and that he has not been notified as to why he is being denied the right to file a direct appeal, petition for postconviction relief, and/or a habeas petition. Id. at 18. Upon his arrival at NJSP, Plaintiff began to ask “unit staff how to go about getting case law, addresses to Iowa state courts, so that he may file his direct appeal.” Id. at 18. He alleges that, despite his repeated requests to the law library, classification, and administrative department, he has received no access to Iowa legal materials and was unable to determine who is responsible for handling this type of request. Id. Plaintiff also alleges that he filed and exhausted numerous grievances regarding the denial of Iowa legal materials. Id.

Plaintiff alleges that he received three responses to his requests from the NJSP law library, but Plaintiff characterizes them as “nonsense.” Id. Unidentified law library personnel told Plaintiff: “In order to secure Iowa case law, you should write to the Public Defender's Office in Iowa or write to Oregon requesting same.” Id. at 19. Although Plaintiff did not have an appointed attorney, law library personnel also told him that “Inmates are not allowed to give anything to their attorneys for retention. You can send out what your attorney needs by way of legal mail.” Id. at 19-20.

Plaintiff also alleges he wrote six letters to the Commissioner at NJSP, who is responsible for promulgating policies and procedures at NJSP, but he received no response.^[2] See id. at 21.

After Plaintiff was unsuccessful obtaining assistance at NJSP, he allegedly sent out numerous handwritten letters to K. Williams, the interstate compact coordinator in Oregon, requesting access to Iowa state law and research about out of time appeals, but she failed to respond. Id. at 20. Plaintiff also sent a letter to Karin Zeh, and the law librarian at Plaintiff's previous institution in Oregon, and also received no response. Id.

Plaintiff also sent 10 letters to Mike Brown, the Interstate Corrections Compact Coordinator in Iowa, asking for Iowa state law, caselaw, and research material, but received no response. See id. at 21. Plaintiff sent three letters to the law librarian at IMCC, and also received no response. Id. at 21.

Plaintiff has sued Defendants in three states. In New Jersey, he has sued Donna Sweeney, a Supervising Administrative Analyst, “who Plaintiff has been told to contact” about obtaining an out of state transfer. See id. at 3. Plaintiff has also sued Glenda Striblings, title unknown, who coordinates out of state transfers for New Jersey. Id. Plaintiff has also sued the Bruce Davis, the Administrator of New Jersey State Prison, who is responsible for day-to-day operations of the prison, Marcus O. Hicks, the Acting Commissioner for New Jersey State Prison, who is responsible for ensuring that polices are followed by subordinates, including the Warden. Id. at 3-4. Plaintiff has sued Gary Lanigan, the prior Commissioner of New Jersey State Prison as well.

In Oregon, Plaintiff has sued K. Williams, the Interstate Compact Coordinator for the Oregon State Department of Corrections, who is responsible for interstate transfers, as well as William's supervisor Karen Zeh. Both Williams and Zeh allegedly failed to respond to Plaintiff's letters. Ivester has also sued Zeh's supervisor, Greg Jones. Id. at 4-5. Plaintiff has also sued John Doe Oregon Defendants, including the Director of the Oregon Department of Corrections, and the wardens of Snake River Correctional Institution and East Oregon Correctional Institution. Id. at 5.

In Iowa, Plaintiff has sued Greg Ort, the Deputy Warden of the Iowa Medical and Classification Center, who was the Acting Warden at the time Plaintiff was housed there. See Id. at 6. As described above, Ort allegedly denied Plaintiff access to his attorney and research materials during his trial and would not allow him to file an appeal.^[3]Plaintiff has also sued Mike Brown, the Interstate Compact Coordinator for State of Iowa, who is responsible for interstate transfers to and from Iowa Department of Corrections, See id. at 6. As described above, Brown failed to respond to Plaintiff's letters. Plaintiff has also sued John Doe Defendants in Iowa, including the Director of Operations for the Iowa Department of Corrections and the Warden of the Iowa Medical and Classification Center. Id.

Plaintiff has sued all Defendants in their official capacities for injunctive relief only. The only relief Plaintiff seeks in his Amended Complaint is to be transferred to Iowa where he believes he can access caselaw, legal research, and court information he needs to challenge his 2015 Iowa state conviction.

b. Procedural History

Ivester submitted his original Complaint for filing on or about July 16, 2019. ECF No. 1. Complaint at 26. The Court dismissed the Complaint in its entirety pursuant to its screening authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and provided Plaintiff with leave to amend. ECF Nos. 5-6. Plaintiff subsequently filed an Amended Complaint, ECF No. 7, which is subject to screening by this Court.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. 104-134, §§ 801-810, 110 Stat. 1321-66 to 1321-77 (Apr. 26 1996) (“PLRA”), district courts must review prisoner complaints when the prisoner is proceeding in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(...