Brown v. Annucci

Background

Byron K. Brown filed this action alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. The opinion states that Brown was representing himself and had been allowed to proceed without paying filing fees. The court had previously ordered service on 12 identified defendants and directed the New York State Attorney General to identify two correction officers referred to as John Doe defendants.

Brown later filed an amended complaint that identified one additional defendant but repeated the allegations involving the two unidentified officers. The court’s amended service order kept the Attorney General’s duty to identify those officers in effect.

Rulings concerning the Doe defendants

The Attorney General identified “Rodriguez” John Doe as Sing Sing Correction Officer David O. Rodriguez under a procedure requiring assistance in identifying an unknown defendant. Because the claims against Rodriguez could be understood from the complaint, the court directed the Clerk to add David O. Rodriguez to the docket without requiring Brown to file another amended complaint. The Clerk was also directed to prepare the documents needed for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Rodriguez. The order stated that Brown was responsible for ensuring service within 90 days after the summons was issued or requesting an extension if necessary.

The Attorney General reported that the remaining John Doe could be one of 25 correction officers and could not be identified without more information from Brown. The court ordered Brown to submit, by January 27, 2020, a letter providing a more detailed description, including information such as approximate height, weight, race or ethnicity, hair color, and other distinguishing features.

Disposition

The court directed the Clerk to terminate “Rodriguez” John Doe from the docket and add David O. Rodriguez as a defendant. It also directed the Clerk to complete the service forms and send the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court ordered Brown to provide additional identifying information for the remaining John Doe and warned that the action could be dismissed if Brown failed to notify the court of an address change.

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion is an order about identifying defendants and service; it does not decide the merits of Brown’s constitutional-rights allegations.