The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
DEVANTE JIGGETTS,
Plaintiff,
v. CAUSE NO. 3:23-CV-102-JD-JEM
ARKMARK,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
Devante Jiggetts, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint alleging he was
served a piece of cake with staples in it at the St. Joseph County Jail on January 11, 2023.
ECF 1. “A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed, and a pro se complaint,
however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal
pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation
marks and citations omitted). Nevertheless, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the court must
review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or
malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary
relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.
Jiggetts alleges he saw the staples before he ate the cake and reported it to a
guard. He says the guard replaced his meal and reported the incident to a sergeant for
investigation. Jiggetts speculates it was not properly investigated. Jiggetts indicates this
happened before he was confined, but that is impossible since he was clearly an inmate
at the jail when this happened. It is most likely he was a pretrial detainee. “In
evaluating the constitutionality of conditions or restrictions of pretrial detention . . . the
proper inquiry is whether those conditions amount to punishment of the detainee.” Id.
“[I]n the absence of an expressed intent to punish, a pretrial detainee can nevertheless
prevail by showing that the actions are not ‘rationally related to a legitimate
nonpunitive governmental purpose’ or that the actions ‘appear excessive in relation to
that purpose.’” Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389, 398 (2015) (quoting Bell). However,
for a pre-trial detainee to establish a claim under the Fourteenth Amendment, “it will
not be enough to show negligence or gross negligence.” Miranda v. Cty. of Lake, 900 F.3d
335, 353 (7th Cir. 2018).
Jiggetts found staples in his cake. It is unclear how they got there, but thankfully
he was not injured by them. Without a physical injury, this complaint does not state a
claim. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e). “The usual standard in civil cases is to allow defective
pleadings to be corrected, especially in early stages, at least where amendment would
not be futile.” Abu-Shawish v. United States, 898 F.3d 726, 738 (7th Cir. 2018). However,
“courts have broad discretion to deny leave to amend where . . . the amendment would
be futile.” Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 432 (7th Cir. 2009). Such is the case
here.
For these reasons, this case is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
SO ORDERED on July 26, 2023
/s/JON E. DEGUILIO
JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT