Opinion
C.A. No. 04-442 ML.
October 27, 2004
Report and Recommendation
Confined at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections, Adult Correctional Institution, pro se plaintiff Raymond Lynch has filed a Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has brought this action alleging a violation of his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, and alleges a violation of Article I, Section 2 of the Rhode Island Constitution. Plaintiff names as defendants Lt. Alves, C/O Cordeiro, Kristin Lomberto, and Walter Whitman, employees at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections.
The factual basis for the plaintiff's complaint is as follows: Plaintiff alleges that he was issued a disciplinary report charging him with "conduct constituting a crime" due to a letter he deposited in the prison mail system. The letter, addressed to an individual who lodged a no-contact order against the plaintiff, was intercepted by prison officials. Following the issuance of the disciplinary charges, plaintiff appeared before a disciplinary board for a hearing. The board found the plaintiff guilty, solely on the basis of the disciplinary report, and sentenced the plaintiff to fifteen days in punitive segregation with a loss of fifteen days of good time credit. Due to his placement in segregation, plaintiff also avers that he had a reduction in privileges. Plaintiff indicates that he appealed the board's decision through the internal processes unsuccessfully.
Section 1915A of Title 28 of the United States Code directs the Court to review prisoner complaints before docketing or soon thereafter to identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; See also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Pursuant to this directive, this Court finds that the instant complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for the following reasons:
(1) To the extent that the plaintiff seeks redress for his fifteen days in punitive segregation and loss of privileges, such a claim is not cognizable under the Fourteenth Amendment. Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995). The deprivations plaintiff complains of are not "atypical" and "significant" in relation to the ordinary instances of prison life. See id.
(2) To the extent that the plaintiff seeks a restoration of his good time credit, a state prisoner has no cause of action under § 1983 to challenge the very fact or duration of his physical imprisonment. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). His sole federal remedy lies in a writ of habeas corpus. Id.
(3) To the extent that the plaintiff seeks monetary damages due to deficiencies during his disciplinary hearing, such an action is not cognizable under § 1983. Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 (1997).
(4) Finally, to the extent that plaintiff seeks to recover damages for alleged violations of the Rhode Island Constitution, plaintiff is directed to the state courts to pursue these claims.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, I recommend that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and his complaint be dismissed. Any objection to this report and recommendation must be specific and must be filed with the Clerk of Court within ten days of its receipt. FED.R.CIV.P. 72 (b). Failure to file timely, specific objection to this report constitutes waiver of both the right to review by the district court and the right to appeal the district court's decision.United States v. Valencia-Copete, 792 F.2d 4 (1st Cir. 1986) (per curiam); Park Motor Mart, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 616 F.2d 603 (1st Cir. 1980).