Sims v. Turingan

Background

Dwayne C. Sims, who was incarcerated at Correctional Training Facility, filed a complaint without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that correctional officer A. Turnigan assaulted him and verbally disrespected him on March 1, 2021, during a dispute about whether Sims could go to his work assignment.

According to the complaint, Turnigan repeatedly told Sims to return to his cell. After Sims asked for a supervisor to mediate, Turnigan told him he would be arrested. Sims complied with an order to turn around and submit to handcuffing, but alleged that Turnigan aggressively handcuffed and pulled his wrists, twisted and bent his left wrist, and caused pain. Sims reported a sore left wrist, continuing shoulder pain, and numbness requiring surgery. He sought injunctive relief, relief from a rule-violation report, damages, and other relief against Turnigan.

Screening and Claim

Because Sims was a prisoner seeking relief from a governmental officer, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court explained that screening requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also stated that a claim under § 1983 requires an alleged violation of a federal right by a person acting under state law.

Construing Sims’s allegations liberally, the court found a cognizable claim against Turnigan for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court ordered service of the complaint on Turnigan under the applicable California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation service procedure. The opinion therefore allowed the claim to proceed past initial screening; it did not decide whether Sims ultimately would prevail.

Request for Counsel

Sims asked the court to appoint a lawyer. The court denied that request without prejudice. Applying the standard for appointment of counsel in exceptional circumstances, the court found that Sims appeared able to present his claims adequately and that the legal issues were not complex.

Case Management

The court established procedures for service, responses, dispositive motions, and discovery. It directed defendants to file a summary-judgment motion or another dispositive motion within the stated time after their answer was due, and it set deadlines for Sims’s opposition and defendants’ reply. The court also explained the possible consequences of summary judgment and dismissal for failure to exhaust available administrative remedies. It permitted discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and authorized defendants to depose incarcerated witnesses.

Disposition

The court ordered service on A. Turnigan and denied Sims’s request for appointment of counsel without prejudice. The opinion is an initial screening and case-management order, not a final decision on the excessive-force claim.