Bradford v. Lemon

Background

Raymond Alford Bradford, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and applied to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court ordered him to explain why the action should not be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That provision generally bars a prisoner from proceeding without paying the filing fee when the prisoner has brought at least three prior actions or appeals that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, unless the prisoner was under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The court’s earlier order identified four prior dismissals that appeared to count as strikes and stated that Bradford could avoid dismissal by paying the filing fee by the deadline.

Bradford’s response

Bradford did not contest that he had at least three qualifying strikes. He argued instead that the imminent-danger exception applied. He alleged that prison officials at multiple prisons were conspiring to have him murdered, tampering with his mail to prevent him from filing cases, denying him paper, pens, and envelopes, and exposing him to other conditions. He also alleged that guards had assaulted him, most recently on March 12, 2021, and that a failed cell light caused blurry vision when he wrote in the dark.

Court’s analysis

The court observed that Bradford had filed and litigated numerous cases in four federal district courts during the previous four years. It therefore concluded that he appeared able to access the courts despite his allegations of mail interference.

The court found that Bradford had repeatedly made similar general allegations about assaults and a conspiracy to murder him over several years. It held that these allegations did not plausibly show that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed this case. The court also noted that Bradford filed the case on February 17, 2021, while at Salinas Valley State Prison, and was later transferred to the California Health Care Facility. The court stated that the alleged March 12 assault occurred nearly a month after filing and perhaps at a different prison.

Ruling

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton concluded that each of the four earlier dismissals counted under the three-strikes rule, that Bradford had not paid the filing fee, and that he had not shown imminent danger at the time of filing. The court denied his application to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed the action for failure to pay the filing fee. The dismissal was without prejudice to asserting the claims in a new complaint for which Bradford paid the full filing fee when filing it.