Smiley v. Corpus

Background

Jeremy Jerome Smiley, identified in the opinion as an inmate at California State Prison - Solano, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 concerning events at Maguire Correctional Facility. The defendants include Christina Corpus and others. The court reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires screening of a prisoner’s lawsuit seeking relief from a government entity or government officer or employee.

Smiley alleged that a cellmate accused him of punching the cellmate, after which Smiley was moved to another housing unit. He also alleged reductions in telephone and recreational privileges. The court noted that Smiley did not say he had not punched the cellmate, identify defects in any disciplinary process, explain why the new housing unit was unacceptable, or state whether the privilege reduction was punishment or an incidental result of the housing assignment. He also did not explain how long the reduction lasted.

Smiley alleged that inmates of different races were treated differently, but he did not explain what harm he suffered or state that he belonged to a comparatively disfavored group. He said that a prison officer used her personal phone while on duty but did not identify any resulting harm. He alleged that, during the month before filing the complaint, he could not see a specific doctor about psychological issues, but he did not say that the doctor was a mental-health professional or that he could not see another mental-health professional; the opinion states that he received other medical treatment. Finally, a grievance attached to the complaint alleged that he was not allowed to work in jail.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that Smiley had not stated a claim for relief. It explained that a brief loss of privileges generally does not create a protected liberty interest without more information, and that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to a prison job. The court also found the other allegations insufficient because the complaint did not identify the necessary harm or facts showing a constitutional violation.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, with leave to amend to the extent Smiley could remedy the identified defects. If he wished to continue pursuing Section 1983 claims, he could file a first amended complaint within 35 days of the order. The court stated that, if he failed to file an amended complaint within that period and in accordance with the order, the action would be dismissed with prejudice. It also warned that failing to prosecute the case or comply with court orders could result in dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

The court granted Smiley’s application to proceed without paying the full filing fee at the outset. It assessed an initial partial filing fee of $29.66 and directed that payments be made from his prison trust account as described in the attached instructions.