Stevens v. Joseph

Background

Jamel Stevens, who was incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and was proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action against C.O. Bermann Joseph, C.O. Sakaya A. Cameron, C.O. Elizabeth A. Gurney, and Michael Capra. He asked to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis.

Stevens alleged that the defendants strip-searched him in a way that violated a New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision directive. He also alleged that they improperly confiscated his television.

Three-strikes rule

The Prison Litigation Reform Act bars a prisoner from proceeding without prepaying fees if the prisoner has, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated or detained, filed an action or appeal that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim. An exception applies if the prisoner is under an imminent danger of serious physical injury—meaning a danger existing when the complaint is filed.

The court stated that Stevens was already barred from filing new actions without prepaying fees while incarcerated. It found that his complaint did not show that he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed it.

Ruling

The court denied Stevens’s request to proceed without prepaying fees. It dismissed the complaint without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes rule. The opinion states that Stevens may bring a new action by paying the filing fee; that action would then be reviewed under the prisoner-screening statute.

The court also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. Stevens remains barred from filing future actions without prepaying fees while incarcerated unless he is under an imminent threat of serious physical injury.