Summary
This Report and Recommendation from the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada addresses Defendants' motion for summary judgment in a pro se civil rights action brought by an inmate under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff alleges excessive force by prison staff in violation of the Eighth Amendment and procedural due process violations during a disciplinary hearing under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Magistrate Judge recommends denying summary judgment on the excessive force claim due to genuine disputes of material fact, while recommending granting summary judgment on the due process claim because the plaintiff received all required procedural protections.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Defendants are liable for excessive force under the Eighth Amendment.
- Whether Defendant Rigney violated Truman's Fourteenth Amendment procedural due‑process rights.
Holdings
- Summary judgment is denied on the Eighth Amendment excessive‑force claim.
- Summary judgment is granted on the Fourteenth Amendment due‑process claim.
Key quotations
“The Eighth Amendment’s proscription on cruel and unusual punishment forbids prison officials from inflicting “the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain . . ..” Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 319 (1986).”
“Courts in the Ninth Circuit apply a five‑part balancing test to excessive‑force claims: (1) the extent of the inmate’s injuries; (2) the need for application of force; (3) the relationship between the need and amount of force; (4) the threat reasonably perceived by prison officials; and (5) any efforts that officials utilized to “temper the severity of a forceful response.” Martinez v. Stanford, 323 F.3d at 1184 (9th Cir. 2003).”
Factual background
On May 20, 2022, while being escorted by Defendants Moore, Houston, and Leong at the High Desert State Prison, Truman was hand‑cuffed, leg‑shackled, kicked, punched, and thrown to the ground, sustaining bruises and a split lip. He was later charged with battery and disciplined despite claiming the force was excessive and that disciplinary officials failed to review exculpatory video evidence.
Procedural history
Truman filed a 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil rights complaint on December 12, 2022 alleging excessive force and due‑process violations. The district court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. §1915A and allowed the claims to proceed. After discovery, Defendants moved for summary judgment on October 15, 2024, which the magistrate judge reviewed and issued a report and recommendation dated January 8, 2025.