Wright v. Annucci

Background

Deshard Wright, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and proceeding without a lawyer, filed an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that the defendants denied him the right to participate in a Jumah prayer service at Sing Sing on April 14, 2023. The defendants named in the amended complaint are Acting Commissioner Anthony Annucci, sued in his official capacity; Sergeant Joseph; and two unidentified correctional officers: the officer in charge of Wright’s housing unit and the officer who escorted him to Jumah services.

The operative pleading was Wright’s amended complaint, filed September 9, 2023. Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain had already granted Wright permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The court also accepted the case as related to an earlier case identified in the opinion by docket number 23-CV-6056 (CS).

Service on Named Defendants

Because Wright was permitted to proceed without prepaying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and prepare the required service forms for Acting Commissioner Annucci and Sergeant Joseph. The U.S. Marshals Service was directed to receive the necessary paperwork and serve those defendants. The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and that Wright should request more time if service is not completed within that period.

The court also instructed Wright to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action could be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Identifying the John Doe Defendants

The court relied on the rule that a self-represented litigant is entitled to help from the district court in identifying an unnamed defendant. It found that Wright had provided enough information for the New York State Attorney General’s Office to identify the two unnamed correctional officers, including their badge numbers and service addresses.

The Attorney General’s Office was ordered to provide that information to Wright and the court within 60 days. Within 30 days after receiving the information, Wright must file a second amended complaint naming the officers. That complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the current amended complaint. The court will then screen the second amended complaint and, if necessary, direct service on the newly named defendants.

Request for Volunteer Counsel

Wright moved for the court to request volunteer legal counsel. The court considered the factors applicable to an indigent litigant’s request for counsel, including the apparent merits of the claims, efforts to obtain a lawyer, and the litigant’s ability to investigate and present the case without assistance. The court stated that it could not conclude at that stage that Wright’s claims were likely to have merit.

The court denied Wright’s motion for counsel without prejudice to renewal at a later date. This ruling did not determine the merits of Wright’s claims.

Referral to Legal Clinic and Disposition

The court referred Wright to the New York Legal Assistance Group Clinic, a private organization that provides limited-scope assistance to people representing themselves in civil cases in the Southern District of New York. The court explained that the clinic is not part of the court and cannot file papers for Wright.

The court directed the Clerk to issue and arrange service of the summonses for Acting Commissioner Annucci and Sergeant Joseph, send the complaint and order to the New York State Attorney General’s Office, and provide Wright with information about the clinic and the second amended complaint form. Judge Cathy Seibel denied Wright’s motion for the court to request pro bono counsel without prejudice to renewal later. The order addressed service, identification of defendants, and counsel; it did not decide whether Wright would prevail on his § 1983 claims.