Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada Voulentters

Plaintiff, who is a prisoner in the custody of the Nevada department of corrections (“NDOC”), has submitted a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.  In the complaint, plaintiff sues multiple defendants for events that took place while plaintiff was incarcerated as a pretrial detainee at the Clark County Detention Center (“CCDC”). In count I, plaintiff alleges the following: classified plaintiff, a pretrial detainee, as “max status” to punish plaintiff. Under this classification, jail officials confined plaintiff to his cell for 23 hours a day on the weekdays and 48 hours for the weekends, denied plaintiff all programs, restricted plaintiff’s television viewing options, restricted visitation, and restricted commissary. Plaintiff had been in solitary maximum lock up for over 730 days. Two prison officials mailed plaintiff a letter sanctioning plaintiff to 60 days confinement which prohibited commissary and visitation. (Id.) This sanction caused extreme hardship because jail officials did not serve enough food to properly feed the inmates. (Id. at 23, 28). The official’s sanction caused plaintiff to lose 70 pounds. (Id. at 28). Another officer also allegedly came into plaintiff’s cell and sexually assault plaintiff. (ECF No. 1 at 24). Officers slammed plaintiff backwards and injured plaintiff’s neck and head. (Id.) After plaintiff hit the concrete in handcuffs, the officers rolled plaintiff onto his back and stood on his back. In the meantime, plaintiff was suffocating from the officers on his back. (Id. at 42). After plaintiff returned to consciousness from the lack of air, the officer put a taser in plaintiff’s mouth. When the officers stopped, plaintiff’s boxers were pulled down to his knees and the officers laughed at plaintiff as they walked away. (Id.) Plaintiff went into convulsions.

Plaintiff sues multiple defendants for events that occurred at High Desert State Prison (“HDSP”). On October 2013, client received a threat of bodily harm from another inmate.  Plaintiff reported the threat to his unit (7 A/B) floor officer. On October 24, 2013, plaintiff participated in a “full classification committee” (“FCC”) meeting. (Id.). This FCC meeting was conducted by caseworker supervisor C. Leavitt with warden Neven in attendance. (Id.). At this meeting, plaintiff completed a “central monitoring system” (“CMS”) form which listed inmate as being added to plaintiff’s “enemy list.” (Id.). The effect of this form is to alert prison officials that plaintiff seeks protection from harm at the hands of this inmate . Plaintiff was led to believe that this inmate would be moved from unit 7/8 and plaintiff would be safely moved back in. (Id.) On the morning of February 11, 2014, plaintiff was staged with other inmates in the unit 7/8 yard, waiting for an escort to the education building. (Id. at 5). The inmate made an unauthorized exit from his cell into the yard. (Id.). John Does II and III are both responsible for this unauthorized exit. (Id.). Inmate  attacked plaintiff with stones, gravel, and his fists. (Id.). Plaintiff suffered various injuries, including a broken nose. (Id.). One of the supervisors  responded to the yard when this incident occurred. (Id.) As a result of the attack, plaintiff suffered extreme physical, emotional, and mental pain. (Id.).

The plaintiff brings this civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for events that he alleges occurred during his incarceration at High Desert State Prison (HDSP). Plaintiff’s problems at HDSP began on March 23, 2016, when the C.O. challenged him to a fight. The plaintiff filed a grievance against C.O. based on the incident, which set off a wave of retaliation by the C.O. and other guards.

On March 24, the C.O. pointed a shotgun at the plaintiff and other inmates (who were merely waiting in the unit), called them offensive names, and threatened them. He said to them, “Give me a reason to shoot.” The plaintiff filed another grievance against the C.O. In response, C.O. and others searched the plaintiff’s cell on April 30. Another C.O. warned the plaintiff, while adverse C.O. remained at the window with a shotgun. He told him that if the plaintiff did not cooperate, he “would be taken down by any means necessary.”

The plaintiff stated that the guards searched his cell because they had not stood in a straight line during the last meal. Plaintiff responded that he was not present at that meal, but the plaintiff retorted that he was doing what he was told.

Plaintiff then stated to both C.O.s that they were retaliating against him for filing grievances against one of them. The other C.O. responded that “messing with another C.O. is like messing with me.”

Plaintiff filed a grievance against both C.O.s. Plaintiff alleges that 3 C.O.s retaliated against him on multiple occasions for filing grievances against them. He identifies the following instances: (a) One of the C.O. pointing a shotgun at the plaintiff and stating, “Give me a reason to shoot”;

(b) C.O. having his cell searched multiple times based on pretenses (such as inmates not
lining up during a meal);

(c) C.O. confiscating the plaintiff’s sneakers, even though he was able to prove proof of ownership.

Per the plaintiff, he finds that these allegations state a colorable claim against the three defendants.