Timmy Kinner v. IDOC Attorney General 2022 to current; Klinton Hust, IDOC Interstate Compact Coordinator; IDOC Wardens; Josh Tewalt; and Marissa Doan (I.C.C.)

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Idaho conducts a successive screening review of Timmy Kinner’s amended prisoner civil-rights complaint against Idaho Department of Correction officials. The court concludes that Kinner is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes provision, finds that several allegations are untimely or insufficiently specific, and continues the case in the pre-litigation screening phase. The court orders a Martinez report addressing Kinner’s safety, correspondence, medical and prison records, and IDOC supervisory responsibilities.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff became subject to the PLRA three-strikes provision on April 21, 2023, before filing this action, because he had at least three qualifying prior dismissals. Accordingly, he may proceed in forma pauperis only if he satisfies the imminent-danger exception; otherwise, he must pay the filing fee.
2. The court did not finally determine whether Plaintiff satisfied the imminent-danger exception; instead, it continued screening and ordered factual development concerning the alleged ongoing danger and its nexus to the claims.
3. Respondeat superior does not impose § 1983 liability merely because a defendant supervised the person who allegedly committed the constitutional violation. A supervisor may be liable only upon personal involvement or a sufficient causal connection between the supervisor's wrongful conduct and the constitutional violation.
4. A district court may, in an appropriate case, order a reasonably tailored Martinez-style report during pre-litigation screening to obtain information needed to assess the case and make a screening determination.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff is subject to the PLRA three-strikes provision and must satisfy the imminent-danger exception to proceed in forma pauperis.
2. Whether the amended complaint adequately alleges personal participation or a sufficient causal connection by Idaho supervisory officials to constitutional violations occurring in Florida.
3. Whether the court should continue pre-litigation screening and order a Martinez report to develop facts concerning Plaintiff's alleged ongoing danger, correspondence, injuries, and supervisory structure.
4. Whether Plaintiff's claims arising from events between 2018 and 2022 are barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations.

Disposition

other