ipl-logo

Amended Complaint At High Desert State Prison

1142 Words5 Pages

Plaintiff is an inmate in the custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC), and at all times relevant to the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff was incarcerated at High Desert State Prison (HDSP). On February 27, 2014, Plaintiff was brought before the Full Classification Committee, in which it was determined he was suitable for housing in general population. Am. Compl. at 16. During this Classification Committee meeting, Plaintiff did not state that he could not be housed with inmate Ruiz because they were enemies. Id. at 6-7. On February 28, 2014, Plaintiff was involved in an altercation with inmate Ruiz. Id. As a result of this altercation, inmate Ruiz died and Plaintiff was subsequently charged and found guilty of battery and murder. …show more content…

Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Rainone and Nash failed to protect Plaintiff from a “foreseeable inmate assault” and were “deliberate [sic] indifferent to the Plaintiff’s right to be free from inmate assault.” Am. Compl. at 12-21. Plaintiff further contends that Defendants Pugh and Neven conspired against the Plaintiff to “obstruct the due course of justice.” Id. at 22. Lastly, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Neven, Nash, and Cox, who is not a named defendant, were “deliberate [sic] indifferent to the Plaintiff’s personal safety by their failure” to create adequate procedures for handling “PREA cases” (Prison Rape Elimination Act). Id. at …show more content…

Am. Compl. at 15. Plaintiff has alleged that Defendant Nash was negligent by “carelessly” moving the Plaintiff into the same unit as inmate Ruiz. Am. Compl. at 7-8, 16. However, negligence cannot give rise to action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Williams v. Field, 416 F.2d 483, 485 (9th Cir. 1969). (“In order to be actionable under section 1983 … we believe that more than an isolated incident of negligent failure to protect must be alleged. The federal courts have stated on numerous occasions that absent unusual circumstances they will not intervene in the internal administration of state prison systems.”). In Plaintiff’s opposition, he argues that the second cause of action is not a Section 1983 claim, but a claim for “negligence under state law constituting a tort.” However, even accepting that as true, Plaintiff failed to comply with NRS 41.031. NRS 41.031

Show More
Related

  • Florence V. Court Detention Center Case Summary

    1328 Words  | 6 Pages

    Albert W. Florence, the petitioner in this case, was initially arrested in 1998 and charged with use of a deadly weapon and obstruction of justice (Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, Opinion, I). He pled guilty to two lesser counts and was ordered to make monthly payments to cover his fine. However, as stated in the Opinion of the Court, he did not keep up with his payments, and a warrant was issued for his arrest in 2003. Florence paid the rest of his fine only days later. However, when he and his wife were pulled over in Burlington County, New Jersey, in 2005, the state trooper’s computer system still had Florence’s warrant, so he arrested and transported him to Burlington County Detention Center.

    Read More

  • Coker V. Georgia Case Study

    736 Words  | 3 Pages

    A supreme case over a rape, murder, assault and a kidnapping

    Read More

  • Case Project 3 Response To Action

    834 Words  | 4 Pages

    Lisa Hetherington LGST 495 7980 Professor Hansen 17 April 2016 Project 3: Response to Action Introduction This case was brought by the plaintiff, Mr. Jim Jones, who alleges that the Defendants, Grab-n-Go, Inc. (“the store”) and by proxy, its owner, Mr. John Smith, did negligently leave some amount of coffee creamer on the floor near the coffee bar, which he stepped on, slipped and fell, but for causing the injuries he sustained that day. The defendants, through their attorneys, move to DISMISS the counts brought against them pursuant to Md. Rules 2-322(b)(2), Failure to State a Claim. The plaintiff, Mr. Jones, alleges one cause of action: Negligence (Count I), Maintaining Negligent Conditions. He stated in his claim that the store employees failed to clean up a mess of coffee creamer, which was part of their duty of care to him as an invitee on the premises, and upon which he slipped.

    Read More

  • Bowers Vs Devianto Case Study

    530 Words  | 3 Pages

    During this time frame, the accused had no direct supervision of the parolee. The defendants were not appreciative of any danger the parolee Mr. Vanda posed to the community or to the decedent. Were the actions of the board so direct account of his carelessness release of Mr. Vanda that it assumes the state action as required to state a claim under section 1983? I surmise that the incontestable facts fail to establish the necessary state

    Read More

  • Tom Geers: Federal Sentence

    55 Words  | 1 Pages

    We appreciate you taking an interest in Tom Geers, and are thankful that you are willing to work with us to try to help him. We request that his case be re-opened. We want his present Florida consecutive sentence CHANGED to a concurrent sentence with his present Federal sentence. We believe Tom’s sentence is extreme.

    Read More

  • Whitley Vs Albers Case Summary

    405 Words  | 2 Pages

    1. In this case a major fight broke out in the cafeteria. As officers tried to regain control of the situation, one of the prisoner’s fingers was broken. The prisoner does not have a case against the prison/officer.

    Read More

  • Pima Civil Court Case Report

    812 Words  | 4 Pages

    On the morning of February 2nd, 2018, a trial was held in downtown Tucson which I had the privilege of attending. Located in the recently-constructed Pima County Justice Court, a violation of an order of protection and domestic violence trial between two parties was administered on floor 5, room 507. The parties involved were Terry Hansen, the defendant, Peter Connor, his attorney, Cecelia Brough, the plaintiff, and Gabby Ruesch, her attorney. The trial was to begin at 9:00 AM and last for approximately 60 minutes, concluding at 10:00 AM. It was to be led by the Honorable Adam Watters.

    Read More

  • Williams V Clark Pros And Cons

    844 Words  | 4 Pages

    Defendants are facing a mandatory minimum of 10 years in prison, with a maximum of life in prison, if convicted. Therefore, the ends of justice and the effective assistance of counsel is served by a continuance. WHEREFORE, Mr. Williams and Mr. Davis request that this Honorable Court grant the motion and continue to the trial date to a date in the latter part of February 2018, or in the alternative, a hearing on the

    Read More

  • Summary Of Inside Lewisburg Prison

    1318 Words  | 6 Pages

    It brings me much grief that I must be the bringer of terrible news, but then again it must be said and so I continue. Our fellow humans are being tortured and we have done nothing about it. I recently learned about a man named Sebastian Richardson. Richardson is 51 years old. Richardson is apparently one of many who are faced with horrendous abuse and brutal treatment brought upon him by the justice system.

    Read More

  • Review Of Indefensible By David Feige

    1415 Words  | 6 Pages

    David Feige’s Indefensible: One Lawyer’s Journey nto the Inferno of American Justice invites people from all walks of life to a second hand experience of the criminal justice system hard at work. What is most interesting about Feige’s work is its distinct presentation of the life of a public defender in the South Bronx. Instead of simply detailing out his experiences as a public defender, Feige takes it a step further and includes the experiences of his clients. Without the personal relationships that he carefully constructs with each of his defendants, Feige would not be able to argue that the criminal justice system is flimsy at best, decisions always riding on either the judge’s personal attitudes or the clients propensity towards plea bargaining.

    Read More

  • Pike Vs America

    482 Words  | 2 Pages

    : Petitioner, the State of Arizona, sought review of an order entered by the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona, which granted the defendant Pike’s motion to modify his sentence pursuant to Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32. During the time of the offense, a sentence of one year-life was officially put into place. Pike filed a petition for post-conviction relief to have his sentence altered because he believed that his sentence was cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. The trial court granted Pike’s petition and gave him only 15 to 30 years and the state of Arizona filed a petition for review. On July 10, 1975, the defendant Pike was convicted of possession of dangerous drugs for sale which violated the A.R.S. §§ 32-1970(C), 32-1996(C), and 32-1901, and Pike was sentenced to serve a term of not less than 40 nor more than 50 years in the Arizona State Prison.

    Read More

  • Prison Releasee Reoffender Act (PRA)

    972 Words  | 4 Pages

    Rollinson v. State, 743 So. 2d 585 (Fla. App. 4 Dist. 1999) Procedural History The Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court convicted and sentenced the defendant for crimes he committed pursuant to the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act (PRRA).

    Read More

  • Summary Of Gideon's Trumpet By Anthony Lewis

    819 Words  | 4 Pages

    The written story of how Clarence Earl Gideon, a poor Florida man, went from a convicted criminal to ultimately redefining legal history is astounding. The Supreme Court commonly dismisses more cases than it accepts and the fact that a handwritten petition from a prison inmate was accepted shows that even the seemingly most insignificant person can make a difference in our society. The book’s literature is highly legalistic but constantly provides a detailed account of how the judicial system is constructed. Coming from a regular college student standpoint with no previous formal law education, this makes the underlying concept easier to grasp. The story’s setting during the time of the Gideon case, showed how the legal system was constructed towards the growing concept of a defendant’s rights.

    Read More

  • Prisoner's Rights Movement In The 1960s

    231 Words  | 1 Pages

    The prisoner’s rights movement is mostly recognized for the events that occurred through the 1960s until the 1980s but it is important to review cases beforehand that led up to the movement itself. In the case of Pervear v. Massachusetts of 1866 a case was fought through the Supreme Court. The court ruled that prisoners should have no constitutional rights, which concluded the Eighth Amendment did not apply to them. The Eighth Amendment states “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (US Const. Amend XIII).

    Read More

  • Same Sex Relationships In Prison

    256 Words  | 2 Pages

    Same sex relationships is something that has been frowned upon and looked at as morally wrong in society for centuries. With it having such a negative look on it many people are afraid to be open with their sexuality and are keeping it behind closed doors. When talking about Correctional institutions, they have always had their own view/set of rules when it comes to homosexuality and how it should be handled. Even though they say it a non tolerance act while incarcerated, many inmates often exhibit this behavior while in incarcerated. When ruling this case i feel that each party should look at the situation and understand both sides.

    Read More

More about Amended Complaint At High Desert State Prison

Open Document