Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02385/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02385-1/pdf.json

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

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

Many inmates apparently believe that they will receive an immediate payout from a fund

established in Hart v. Hill, No. CV 77-0479-PHX-EHC (MS) (D. Ariz.). No such fund exists. The

inmates in Hart asked for injunctive relief and not monetary damages. The Court at this time

expresses no opinion on whether Plaintiff’s lawsuit may result in an award of damages. 

JDDL-k

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Roque Saul Barraza, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joe Arpaio,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-2385-PHX-NVW (JCG)

ORDER

On August 9, 2005, Plaintiff Roque Saul Barraza, presently confined in the Maricopa

County Tent City Jail, filed a Civil Rights Complaint by a Prisoner ("Complaint") pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("Application to

Proceed").

This is one of more than one thousand (1,000) civil rights actions filed since

September 2004 by Maricopa County Jail inmates.1

Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed and account statement make the showing required

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 1 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JDDL-k - 2 -

by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed will be granted. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), Plaintiff is required to pay the two hundred fifty

dollar ($250.00) statutory filing fee for this action. Plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial

filing fee of two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50). 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

By separate order, the Court will direct the appropriate agency to collect the initial

partial filing fee from Plaintiff’s trust account and forward it to the Clerk of the Court.

Thereafter, Plaintiff will be obligated for monthly payments of twenty percent (20%) of the

preceding month’s income credited to Plaintiff’s trust account. These payments will be

forwarded by the appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in

Plaintiff’s account exceeds ten dollars ($10.00), until the filing fee is paid in full. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(2).

Plaintiff should note that if he is released before the filing fee is paid in full, he must

pay the remaining unpaid amount of the filing fee within one hundred twenty (120) days of

the date of his release. If Plaintiff fails to pay the remainder of the filing fee within one

hundred twenty (120) days of the date of his release, the action will be dismissed, unless

Plaintiff shows good cause, in writing, why he is unable to pay the remainder of the filing

fee.

Plaintiff should further note that a prisoner may not bring a civil action without

complete prepayment of the appropriate filing fee if the prisoner has brought, on three (3) or

more occasions, an action or appeal in a federal court that was dismissed as frivolous, as

malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner

is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against

a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. §

1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the Plaintiff has raised

claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 2 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JDDL-k - 3 -

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). The Court also must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if

Plaintiff fails to exhaust any administrative remedy available to him. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a).

If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other facts,

a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend the complaint before dismissal of the

action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The Court

is required to grant leave to amend "if a complaint can possibly be saved," but not if the

Complaint "lacks merit entirely." Id. at 1129. A court therefore should grant leave to amend

if the pleading could be cured by the allegation of other facts, or if it appears at all possible

that the defect can be corrected. Id. at 1130.

The Court should not, however, advise the litigant how to cure the defects. This type

of advice "would undermine the district judges' role as impartial decisionmakers." Pliler v.

Ford, 124 S.Ct. 2441, 2446 (2004); see also Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1131, n. 13 (declining to

decide whether court was required to inform litigant of deficiencies). Plaintiff's Complaint

will be dismissed with leave to amend because the Complaint may possibly be saved by

amendment.

Complaint

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is named as a Defendant in the Complaint.

Plaintiff alleges three grounds for relief in the Complaint: 1) over one hundred (100)

inmates were housed in thirty-two (32) man pods at Durango Jail, in violation of the Eighth

Amendment; 2) there were insufficient cleaning supplies and bathroom facilities, in violation

of the Eighth Amendment; and 3) overcrowding led to fights, in violation of the Eighth

Amendment. Plaintiff seeks money damages.

Failure to Link

To state a valid claim under § 1983, plaintiffs must allege that they suffered a specific

injury as a result of specific conduct of a defendant, and show an affirmative link between

the injury and the conduct of that defendant. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377

(1976). To state a claim against a state official, the civil rights complainant must allege that

the official personally participated in the constitutional deprivation or that a state supervisory

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 3 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JDDL-k - 4 -

official was aware of widespread abuses and with deliberate indifference to the inmate’s

constitutional rights, failed to take action to prevent further misconduct. King v. Atiyeh, 814

F.2d 565, 568 (9th Cir. 1987); See Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services,

436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978). There is no respondeat superior liability under § 1983, and

therefore, a defendant’s position as the supervisor of persons who allegedly violated

Plaintiff’s constitutional rights does not impose liability. Monell, 436 U.S. 658; Hamilton

v. Endell, 981 F.2d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir. 1992); Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.

1989).

In this case, Plaintiff states only that Defendant Arpaio violated his civil rights.

Plaintiff does not allege that Defendant Arpaio personally participated in the harms alleged

in Plaintiff's individual claims, nor does he allege that Defendant Arpaio was aware of the

harms and failed to act, or that Defendant Arpaio's policies led to the harms. Accordingly,

Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against Defendant Arpaio.

Failure to State a Claim

The deficiencies in Plaintiff's Complaint go beyond his failure to link his injuries to

the named Defendant. Plaintiff should note that allegations of overcrowding, alone, are

insufficient to state a claim under the Eighth Amendment. See Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S.

337, 348 (1982). In this case, Plaintiff has failed to the allege that the conditions in the Jail

created the "wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain" as required to state a Fourteenth and

Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim. Id. 347. The inquiry with respect to

pretrial detainees is whether the prison conditions amount to “punishment” without due

process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 535

(1979). Generally, a prison's "obligation under the [E]ighth [A]mendment is at an end if it

furnishes sentenced prisoners with adequate food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, medical care,

and personal safety." Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1246 (9th Cir.1982) (quotations

omitted). However, this does not mean that federal courts can or should interfere whenever

prisoners are inconvenienced or suffer de minimis injuries. See Bell, 441 U.S. at 539 n.21

(noting that a de minimis level of imposition does not rise to a constitutional violation).

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 4 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JDDL-k - 5 -

Further, Plaintiff has failed to allege that he personally suffered injury from the

conditions he describes. Accordingly, Plaintiff's claims must be dismissed for failure to state

a claim.

Dismissal with Leave to Amend

Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519

(1972), conclusory and vague allegations will not support a cause of action. Ivey v. Board

of Regents of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266 (9th Cir. 1982); Rhodes v. Robinson,

612 F.2d 766, 772 (3d Cir. 1979). Further, a liberal interpretation of a civil rights complaint

may not supply essential elements of the claim that were not initially pled. Ivey, 673 F.2d

at 268. 

Because Plaintiff has failed to link his injuries with the named Defendant, and has

failed to state a claim, the Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice. However, in

keeping with "the rule favoring liberality in amendments to pleadings," the Court will

exercise its discretion and allow Plaintiff to file an amended complaint, if he so desires, to

show what constitutional rights he has been deprived of, and how the conduct of proper

defendants deprived him of said rights. Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987).

 If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, he should note that all causes of

action alleged in an original Complaint which are not alleged in an amended complaint are

waived. See Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir.

1990) ("an amended pleading supersedes the original").

Any amended complaint filed by Plaintiff must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety

on the current, Court-approved form included with this Order and may not incorporate any

part of the original Complaint by reference. See Local Rule of Civil Procedure ("LRCiv")

15.1(a)(2). If Plaintiff cannot fit all of his supporting facts in favor of a particular count on

the Court-approved form, then he may continue on an attachment, but each matter on any

attachment must be clearly referenced to a particular count on the Court-approved form, and

be numbered appropriately.

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 5 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JDDL-k - 6 -

Rule 41(b) Warning

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, this action will

be dismissed without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th

Cir.) (district court may dismiss action for failure to comply with any order of the court), cert.

denied, 506 U.S. 915 (1992). Moreover, because the Complaint has been dismissed for

failure to state a claim, if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint correcting the

deficiencies identified in this Order, the dismissal of this action will count as a “strike” under

the “three strikes” provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED as follows:

(1) Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is GRANTED;

(2) Plaintiff is OBLIGATED to pay the statutory filing fee of two hundred fifty dollars

($250.00) for this action. Plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of two dollars and

fifty cents ($2.50). All fees shall be collected and paid in accordance with this Court’s Order

to the appropriate government agency filed concurrently herewith;

(3) Plaintiff's "Civil Rights Complaint By A Prisoner" (Document #1) ("Complaint")

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITH LEAVE TO

AMEND. Plaintiff SHALL HAVE thirty (30) days from the filing date of this Order to file

an amended complaint in order to state specific allegations of deprivation of constitutional

rights against proper defendant(s), to name as defendant(s) the individual(s) who participated

in the activities alleged in his amended complaint, to state what injury he has suffered as a

result of the activities of the defendant(s), and to show how, prior to filing this action, he

exhausted his administrative remedies as to each of his claims for relief. The amended

complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on the current, Court-approved form

included with this Order, may not incorporate any part of the original Complaint by

reference, and must contain Plaintiff’s original signature. If Plaintiff fails to file the

amended complaint on a current, Court-approved form, the amended complaint will be

stricken, and the action dismissed without further notice to Plaintiff. Any amended

complaint submitted by Plaintiff should be clearly designated as an amended complaint on

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 6 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JDDL-k - 7 -

the face of the document;

(4) The Clerk of Court shall enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice

and without further notice to Plaintiff, if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within

thirty (30) days of the date this Order is filed. Upon entry of judgment, the Clerk shall make

an entry on the docket in this matter indicating that the dismissal of this action falls within

the purview of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g);

(5) A clear, legible copy of every pleading or other document filed SHALL

ACCOMPANY each original pleading or other document filed with the Clerk for use by the

District Judge or Magistrate Judge to whom the case is assigned. See LRCiv 5.4. Failure

to submit a copy along with the original pleading or document will result in the

pleading or document being stricken without further notice to Plaintiff;

(6) At all times during the pendency of this action, Plaintiff SHALL IMMEDIATELY

ADVISE the Court and the United States Marshal of any change of address and its effective

date. Such notice shall be captioned “NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS.” The notice

shall contain only information pertaining to the change of address and its effective date,

except that if Plaintiff has been released from custody, the notice should so indicate. The

notice shall not include any motions for any other relief. Failure to file a NOTICE OF

CHANGE OF ADDRESS may result in the dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b); and

(7) The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to provide Plaintiff with a current, Courtapproved form for filing a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

DATED this 3rd day of November, 2005.

Case 2:05-cv-02385-NVW--JCG Document 5 Filed 11/03/05 Page 7 of 7