OTHA ANDERSON, No. A01815, Plaintiff,
SLAVADOR A. GODINEZ, TERRI ANDERSON, RICHARD HARRINGTON, and JEANNETTA COWAN, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge.
Plaintiff Otha Anderson, an inmate in Menard Correctional Center ("Menard"), brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, based on the denial of his requests for placement in protective custody while at Menard.
This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:
(a) Screening. - The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for Dismissal. - On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint-
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
According to the complaint, upon arrival at Menard from Stateville Correctional Center ("Stateville") in June 2013, Plaintiff Anderson has sought protective custody from "Security Threat Groups, " including, among others, inmate Charles "Chuck" Martin, who murdered Plaintiff's brother and who has "pointed out" Plaintiff to a "Latino Security Threat Group." Plaintiff is disabled and has been attacked by prison gangs in the past, and there are more enemy gangs at Menard than there were at Stateville. According to the complaint, these are documented "enemies" and these "Security Threat Groups" have assured Plaintiff that they will "get" him.
Salvador A. Godinez, Director of the Illinois Department of Corrections ("IDOC"), Warden Richard Harrington, Manager of Inmate Issues Terri Anderson, and Caseworker Supervisor Jeannetta Cowan, were each involved in the decision to deny him protective custody ( see also Doc. 1, pp. 15-16), playing "Russian roulette" with Plaintiff's life.
Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief in the form of a transfer.
Based on the allegations in the complaint, the Court finds it convenient to frame the pro se action into the following count.
Count 1: Defendants Godinez, Harrington, Anderson and Cowan were deliberately indifferent to a serious risk to Plaintiff's safety, but they denied him protective ...