Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_24-cv-00936/USCOURTS-ared-4_24-cv-00936-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

CENTRAL DIVISION 

CARLOS RAY FRAZIER 

ADC #650936 PLAINTIFF 

 

V. NO. 4:24-cv-00936-KGB-ERE 

CAMERON JOHNSON, et al. DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

I. Background 

 Pro se plaintiff Carlos Ray Frazier, an inmate at the W.C. Brassell Adult 

Detention Center, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 2. Mr. Frazier’s 

complaint alleges that: (1) on October 22, 2024, Sheriff Deputy Cameron Johnson 

and Sheriff Deputy M. Bennett allowed a barracks porter to threaten him; (2) Deputy 

Washington then allowed the barracks porter to approach Mr. Frazier’s cell door with 

a weapon; (3) although Mail Lady Judy Brawley removed the barracks porter from 

Mr. Frazier’s cell, she failed to remove him from his position as barracks porter; and 

(4) Major Thompkins allowed the barracks porter to have access to Mr. Frazier’s 

cell. 

Although Mr. Frazier may have stated a plausible failure to protect claim 

against each Defendant, he sues Defendants in their official capacities only seeking 

Case 4:24-cv-00936-KGB Document 4 Filed 10/30/24 Page 1 of 5
2 

both monetary and injunctive relief.1 Mr. Frazier’s official-capacity claims are claims 

against Jefferson County, Defendants’ employer. Brewington v. Keener, 902 F.3d 

796, 800 (8th Cir. 2018). Jefferson County cannot be held vicariously liable under § 

1983 for the acts of county employees. Id. at 800-01 (citing Monell v. New York City 

Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 694-95 (1978)). 

Although not automatically legally responsible for constitutional violations 

committed by employees, Jefferson County can face § 1983 liability when its own 

policies, customs, or practices cause constitutional deprivations. Brewington, 902 

F.3d at 801-02; Corwin v. City of Independence, Missouri, 829 F.3d 695, 699-700 

(8th Cir. 2016). But Mr. Frazier’s complaint contains no allegations suggesting that 

a Jefferson County policy, practice, or custom caused his injury. As a result, he has 

failed to plead a plausible official-capacity claim. 

 As currently stated, Mr. Frazier’s complaint fails to state a plausible 

constitutional claim for relief. However, rather than screen the complaint and 

recommend dismissal, the Court will postpone the screening process to give Mr. 

1 Although Mr. Frazier is considered a three-striker, based on the allegations 

contained in his complaint, he has satisfied the imminent danger exception to the three 

strikes rule. 

Case 4:24-cv-00936-KGB Document 4 Filed 10/30/24 Page 2 of 5
3 

Frazier the opportunity to file an amended complaint clarifying his constitutional 

claims.2

II. Guidelines for Filing Amended Complaint

Mr. Frazier has thirty days to file an amended complaint. If Mr. Frazier files 

an amended complaint, he should specifically: (1) state in which capacity he is suing 

each Defendant; (2) explain how each named Defendant violated his constitutional 

rights; and (3) describe how he was harmed or injured as a result of each Defendant’s 

alleged unconstitutional conduct. 

Mr. Frazier’s amended complaint, if filed, will supersede or replace the 

current complaint. See In re Atlas Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th Cir. 2000) 

(an amended complaint supersedes an original complaint and renders the original 

complaint without legal effect). So, Mr. Frazier should make sure that his amended 

complaint includes all allegations relevant to the claim(s) he wants to pursue in this 

lawsuit. Also, Mr. Frazier should not rely upon, or incorporate by reference, any 

2 Screening is mandated by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires federal 

courts to screen prisoner complaints seeking relief against a governmental entity, officer, 

or employee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or a portion 

thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail 

to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a 

defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). When making this 

determination, the Court must accept the truth of the factual allegations contained in the 

complaint, and it may consider the documents attached to the complaint. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Reynolds v. Dormire, 636 F.3d 976, 979 (8th Cir. 2011). 

Case 4:24-cv-00936-KGB Document 4 Filed 10/30/24 Page 3 of 5
4 

allegations made in his original complaint. In other words, Mr. Frazier’s amended 

complaint, if filed, will stand alone. 

Finally, in his amended complaint, Mr. Frazier need only include a “short and 

plain statement” showing that he is entitled to relief, with factual allegations that are 

“simple, concise, and direct.” FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(1) & (d). At this early stage, there 

is no need to identify witnesses or to describe evidence that he may rely on later to 

prove his claim. 

III. Conclusion

For the reasons explained above, 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 

 1. Mr. Frazier may file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days of 

the entry of this Order. 

2. If Mr. Frazier fails to file an amended complaint, the Court will screen 

the original complaint, which is likely to result in the dismissal of Mr. Frazier’s 

claims. 

3. The Clerk is instructed to provide Mr. Frazier a blank 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

complaint form, along with a copy of this Order. 

 

Case 4:24-cv-00936-KGB Document 4 Filed 10/30/24 Page 4 of 5
5 

SO ORDERED 30 October 2024. 

 ____________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 4:24-cv-00936-KGB Document 4 Filed 10/30/24 Page 5 of 5