The opinion
a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
JARVIS BROWN, CIVIL DOCKET NO. 1:19-CV-600-P
Plaintiff
VERSUS JUDGE DRELL
JAMES LEBLANC, , MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES
Defendants
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court is a civil rights Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed by
Plaintiff Jarvis Brown (“Brown”) (#710737). Brown is an inmate in the custody of
the Louisiana Department of Corrections (“DOC”), incarcerated at the David Wade
Correctional Center in Homer, Louisiana. Brown alleges that he was subjected to
excessive force while incarcerated at the Raymond Laborde Correctional Center.
Because Brown must allege additional facts to support his § 1983 claim, Brown
should AMEND his Complaint (Docs. 1, 13).
I. Background
Brown alleges that he was “maced by Capt. Easterling for prohibited behavior
against another offender and was ordered to come to the bars to be restrained.” (Doc.
1, p. 4). Brown alleges that, after he was restrained, Colonel Bonnette sprayed him
with chemical spray over five times. (Doc. 13, p. 3). Brown allegedly requested
emergency medical treatment, but was threatened by Lt. Duplechain and only
provided with eye solution to rinse his eyes. (Doc. 1, p. 4).
II. Instructions to Amend
“[T]he settled rule [is] that ‘the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain . . .
constitutes cruel and unusual punishment forbidden by the Eighth Amendment.’”
Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 5 (1992) (quoting Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312,
319 (1986)). The Supreme Court has recognized that the Eighth Amendment includes
an “objective component”—in considering a prisoner’s claim, the court must ask “if
the alleged wrongdoing was objectively ‘harmful enough’ to establish a constitutional
violation.” Id. at 8 (quoting Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 298 (1991)). Not every
“malevolent touch by a prison guard gives rise to a federal cause of action.” Id. “The
Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of ‘cruel and unusual’ punishments necessarily
excludes from constitutional recognition uses of physical force, provided
that the use of force is not of a sort ‘repugnant to the conscience of mankind.’” Id. at
9–10 (quoting Whitley, 475 U.S. at 327).
Brown alleges that Captain Easterling utilized chemical agent prior to Brown’s
restraint, and only Colonel Bonnette used chemical spray while Brown was
restrained. (Doc. 13, p. 3). Brown presents no factual allegations against Warden
McCain or James LeBlanc. (Doc. 13, p. 3). Additionally, Brown does not allege a
physical injury suffered from the lack of emergency medical care.
Brown shall amend his Complaint (Docs. 1, 13) and state:
(1) the name(s) of each person who allegedly violated his constitutional rights;
(2) a description of what actually occurred and what each defendant did to
violate his rights; and
(3) a description of the injury sustained as a result of each alleged violation.
Brown should also state whether he received a disciplinary conviction related to the
incident, and if he lost any good time. If so, Brown shall provide a copy of the
conviction. Finally, Brown shall provide a copy of any responses he received to
administrative remedies regarding the incident.
Ill. Conclusion
Because Brown must allege additional facts to support his § 1983 claim, IT IS
ORDERED that Brown AMEND his Complaint (Docs. 1, 13) within thirty (30) days
of the filing of this Order to provide the information outlined above, or dismissal of
this action will be recommended under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Alexandria, Louisiana, on this 19th day of
July 2019.
JOSEPH HL. PERE "MONTES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE