Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-3_20-cv-00035/USCOURTS-ared-3_20-cv-00035-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael Todd Brown
Plaintiff
Brent Cox
Defendant
Bailey Harris
Defendant
Moon
Defendant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

MICHAEL TODD BROWN PLAINTIFF 

ADC #173799 

V. No. 3:20CV0035-BSM-JTR 

BRENT COX, Jail Administrator, 

Greene County Detention Center, et al. DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff Michael Todd Brown (“Brown”) has filed a pro se § 1983 Complaint 

alleging that Defendants Jail Administrator Brent Cox (“Cox”), Sergeant Bailey 

Harris (“Harris”), and Detention Officer Moon (“Moon”) violated his constitutional 

rights during his incarceration at the Greene County Detention Center (“GCDC”). 

Doc. 2. Before Brown may proceed with this case, the Court must screen his claims.1

 

 Brown alleges that, while he was a convicted prisoner at the GCDC awaiting 

transfer to the Arkansas Division of Correction, Defendants: (1) held him in 

disciplinary segregation for sixty days for an alleged infraction without affording 

 1

The Prison Litigation Reform Act 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. Id. § 1915A(b). When 

making this determination, a court must accept the truth of the factual allegations contained in the 

complaint, and it may consider 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 3:20-cv-00035-BSM Document 5 Filed 02/10/20 Page 1 of 3
2 

him due process, and where he was subjected to inhumane conditions of 

confinement; (2) refused to allow him, for over 100 days, to launder his socks, 

underwear and t-shirts; (3) “constantly interfered” with his efforts to utilize the legal 

system; (4) served him “grossly insufficient” amounts of food, which caused him to 

become weak and lose weight; and (5) denied all outdoor exercise. 

 Brown must provide the Court with additional information so it can complete 

the screening required by § 1915A. Thus, Brown must file an Amended Complaint 

explaining: (1) how his ability to access the courts was actually harmed or injured

by the alleged “interference” with his legal activities; (2) how much time he was 

allowed out of his cell for visitation, meals, etc.; (3) the size of his cell, and whether 

he was able to exercise in that cell; and (4) why he has sued Defendants in their 

“official capacity” and his legal basis for doing so. 

 Finally, Brown has filed a notice of change of address which states that he is 

currently residing at what appears to be a private address in Little Rock. Doc. 4. In 

light of his release from custody, it is unclear whether he is still entitled to proceed 

in forma pauperis. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 

 1. The Clerk is directed to mail Brown: (a) a § 1983 complaint form that 

is labeled “Amended Complaint”; and (b) a free-world Application to Proceed In 

Forma Pauperis. 

Case 3:20-cv-00035-BSM Document 5 Filed 02/10/20 Page 2 of 3
3 

 2. Brown must file, within thirty days of the date of this Order: (a) an 

Amended Complaint that complies with the instructions in this Order; and (b) a 

completed free-world Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. 

 3. If Brown does not timely and properly comply with this Order, this case 

will be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). 

 DATED this 10th day of February, 2020. 

 ___________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 3:20-cv-00035-BSM Document 5 Filed 02/10/20 Page 3 of 3