Perry v. Maloney

Background

Ronald Perry, who was incarcerated at the George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island, filed this action without a lawyer. He paid the $5.00 fee for a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a statute allowing a person in custody to challenge detention that allegedly violates federal law or the Constitution.

Perry alleged that he was charged with an infraction, did not receive the misbehavior report until after pleading guilty, and was sentenced to 15 days in punitive segregation. He said he remained in segregation from July 28 through August 26, 2021, partly because he supposedly owed segregation time from 2012. He further alleged that he was then placed in Enhanced Supervision Housing, pleaded not guilty at an August 31 hearing, never received a decision, and remained there. He also alleged limited access to programs and delayed access to law-library services.

Perry named ADW Maloney and Warden Morales as defendants. He asked the court to investigate, overturn the segregation decisions, and award damages for each day he spent in segregation and Enhanced Supervision Housing.

Habeas claim

The court explained that a state pretrial detainee may use Section 2241 to challenge allegedly unlawful custody, but generally must first exhaust available state-court remedies. That exhaustion includes seeking state habeas relief and, if necessary, appealing to New York’s highest court.

Because Perry provided no facts showing that he had exhausted those remedies, the court denied his Section 2241 application without prejudice. The opinion also noted that whether state pretrial detainees may use Section 2241 to challenge conditions of confinement remains an open question in the Second Circuit.

Civil-rights damages claims

The court construed Perry’s claims for damages based on punitive segregation as claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which allows claims against state actors who violate federal rights. A § 1983 claim requires personal and direct involvement by each defendant; a supervisor cannot be held liable solely because someone else allegedly violated the plaintiff’s rights.

The court found that Perry had not alleged facts showing how Maloney or Morales were personally involved in his hearing or detention. It therefore granted Perry leave to amend by naming the officials who were personally and directly involved and by adding facts supporting his due-process claim. The court identified allegations that could be relevant, including the failure to provide the misbehavior report before the hearing, the time allegedly served beyond the sentence imposed, and the lack of a decision after the Enhanced Supervision Housing hearing.

The court also considered a possible conditions-of-confinement claim. Perry’s statement that he had been denied access to “most programs,” without additional details, was not enough to allege conditions posing an excessive risk to his health or safety. The court granted leave to amend that claim with supporting facts.

As to access to the courts, the court held that Perry had not identified an underlying nonfrivolous legal claim that was hindered by the delay in law-library access. It also noted that the complaint did not suggest that Perry lacked access to a criminal defense attorney who could pursue a meritorious issue arising from his criminal proceedings. The court granted leave to amend with facts showing that he was hindered from pursuing an arguably meritorious claim for which he was not represented by counsel.

Filing-fee requirements

The court explained that a civil-rights damages action generally requires a $400.00 filing fee, or an application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization. If permission to proceed without prepaying fees is granted, the $350.00 filing fee is collected in installments from the prisoner’s account; the $50.00 administrative fee does not apply to a person granted that status.

Because the habeas application was denied without prejudice and Perry wished to continue pursuing civil-rights damages claims, the court required him to submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization.

Order

The court granted Perry leave to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The amended complaint had to replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint and had to identify the relevant people, describe what each person did or failed to do, provide dates and locations, describe injuries, and state the requested relief. Perry also had to submit the required fee documents. No summons would issue at that time.

The court stated that if Perry failed to comply within the allowed time and could not show good cause, the complaint would be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with the order. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Perry permission to appeal without prepaying fees. Judge Swain directed the Clerk to mail the order to Perry and note service on the docket.