United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Asheville Division
JOHNNIE D. ALLEN, Plaintiff,
FNU TAYLOR, et al., Defendants.
D. Whitney Chief United States District Judge.
MATTER is before the Court on initial review of
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, filed under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. (Doc. No. 8). See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a). Also pending are Plaintiff's Motion for
Preliminary Injunction, (Doc. No. 12), and Plaintiff's
Motion to Appoint Counsel, (Doc. No. 17). On October 4, 2017,
the Court entered an order waiving the initial filing fee and
directing monthly payments to be made from Plaintiff's
prison account. (Doc. No. 10). Thus, Plaintiff is proceeding
in forma pauperis.
Plaintiff Johnnie D. Allen, a North Carolina prisoner
incarcerated at Maury Correctional Institution in Maury,
North Carolina, filed this action on August 18, 2017,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed an Amended
Complaint on September 25, 2017. Plaintiff has named the
following persons as Defendants: (1) FNU Taylor, identified
as the Security Risk Group (“SRG”) sergeant
employed at Marion Correctional Institution; (2) Jeffery
James, identified as a Unit Manager of F-Unit at Marion; (3)
Morris R. McDaniels, identified as a Unit Manager of F-Unit
at Marion; (4) Robert Barker, identified as a Disciplinary
Hearing Officer; (5) Monica Bond, identified as the Chief
Disciplinary Officer overseeing management of the
Disciplinary Hearing Officers Division of North Carolina
Department of Public Safety (“NCDPS”), Division
of Adult Correction; and (6) and FNU Long, identified as a
Security Risk Group (“SRG”) Captain. Plaintiff
alleges that, while incarcerated at Marion Correctional
Institution, his constitutional due process and other rights
were violated because he was wrongly charged and found guilty
after a disciplinary hearing of participating in gang
activity. He further asserts that Defendant Taylor wrongfully
opened some of his outgoing mail, in violation of his First
Amendment rights. Plaintiff summarizes this action by stating
that he is bringing claims for “invasion of privacy,
conspiracy, discrimination and due process violations, in
violation of the 1st, 4th,
8th, and 14th Amendments of the U.S.
Constitution resulting in excessive punishment and family
hardship and mental/emotion suffering by being placed in a
false light.” (Doc. No. 8 at 1). Plaintiff alleges,
On June 6, 2017, Defendant Taylor opened [Plaintiff's]
outgoing mail and charged him with a A-14 for participation
in gang activity. The Plaintiff is not a validated STG/SRG
prisoner. [Plaintiff] is currently on the SRG associated
watch list but has no mail or any other restrictions as an
assumed associate. [Plaintiff] was read his rights for the
infraction by the investigating officer Sgt. Stuart on
6-13-17 at or around 12 AM. [Plaintiff] gave a statement and
requested the DPS policy and Procedure for SRG mail
restrictions as evidence. Sgt. Stuart also looked up the DPS
Policy and Procedure SRG section on mail and confirmed that
[Plaintiff] was correct, assumed associates are not typically
treated as validated prisoners are.
But St. Stuart refused to allow [Plaintiff] view a copy of
the Policy and Procedure to incorporate in its statement. On
6-20-17 Defendant James told [Plaintiff] the severity on the
charge and again refused to let [Plaintiff] see the Policy
On 6-28-17 [Plaintiff] went before the DHO, Defendant Barker
who ordered reinvestigation due to [Plaintiff's]
requested evidence (the Policy and Procedure) not being
[Plaintiff] wrote his first grievance between 6/20/17 and
6/28/17 but never got a response.
[Plaintiff] was again asked by Defendant James how he pled on
7-3-17 and again pled not guilty.
[Plaintiff] again submitted a grievance handing it to Sgt.
Hensley of the upper F-unit who informed him that it was
given directly to Defendant McDaniel.
Like the first grievance, [Plaintiff]'s second grievance
was ignored and when he asked Defendant McDaniel about it he
was chewed out.
Repeatedly [Plaintiff] asked Staff Sergeants Wilson, Hensley,
Washburn, and Curtis to see the DPS, SRG Policy and Procedure
and was denied.
On 7-12-17, [Plaintiff] again went before Defendant Barker
for the A-14 ‘gang activity' infraction and was
found guilty but the Defendant refused to read or allow
[Plaintiff] to read the Policy and Procedure.
[Plaintiff] was stripped of his phone, visitation, and
canteen privileges for 180 days and was held back in ...