Bradford v. Garcia

Background

Raymond Alford Bradford, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. The court issued an order requiring him to explain why the case should not be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a provision that generally prevents a prisoner from proceeding without prepaying the fee after three or more earlier cases or appeals were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. The provision has an exception when the prisoner was under imminent danger of serious physical injury when the complaint was filed.

The court’s earlier order identified four prior dismissals that appeared to qualify as strikes and told Bradford that he could avoid dismissal either by showing that the imminent-danger exception applied or by paying the filing fee. Bradford responded that he was in imminent danger but did not dispute that he had at least three strikes.

The court’s analysis

Bradford alleged that prison officials were conspiring to have him murdered, tampering with his mail to prevent him from filing cases, and failing to transfer him to a medical facility. He also alleged that guards had assaulted him at various prisons, including an assault on March 12, 2021.

The court found that Bradford’s allegations about court access did not show imminent danger because he had filed and litigated numerous cases in this court and three other federal district courts during the previous four years. The court described the allegations about assaults and a conspiracy to murder him as similar, general, and conclusory allegations that he had made for several years. It also noted that the March 12 assault occurred nearly a month after the case was filed and possibly at a different prison. Finally, the court found that Bradford did not explain how his medical condition placed him in imminent danger of serious physical injury.

Disposition

The court concluded that all four earlier dismissals identified in the order counted for purposes of § 1915(g), that Bradford had not shown that any dismissal should be excluded, and that he had not shown imminent danger at the time he filed the case. Because he also had not paid the filing fee, the court denied his application to proceed without prepaying the fee and dismissed the action for failure to pay the filing fee. The dismissal was without prejudice to Bradford asserting his claims in a new complaint for which he pays the full filing fee. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order.