United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
KAHLIL D. HAMMONS, #Y10318, Plaintiff,
JOHN BALDWIN, and KEITH E. HUBLER, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
M. YANDLE U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Kahlil Hammons, an inmate at Big Muddy River Correctional
Center (“Big Muddy”), brings this action pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivations of his
constitutional rights while he was in the Duquoin Impact
Incarceration Program. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that
Defendant Hubler subjected him to excessive force in
violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 1). 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
action or claim is frivolous if “it lacks an arguable
basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Frivolousness is an
objective standard that refers to a claim that any reasonable
person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209
F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (7th Cir. 2000). An action fails to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead
“enough facts to state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The claim of
entitlement to relief must cross “the line between
possibility and plausibility.” Id. at 557. At
this juncture, the factual allegations of the pro se
complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v.
Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir.
careful review of the Complaint and any supporting exhibits,
the Court finds that the Complaint is sufficient to survive
Complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff makes the following
allegations: At some point between August 26, 2016 and
September 6, 2016, while Plaintiff was at boot camp in
Duquoin, Illinois, there was “an altercation between
Defendant Lieutenant Keith E. Hubler and [Plaintiff] and Lt.
Hubler criminally assaulted [Plaintiff].” (Doc. 1, p.
provides more details regarding the incident in a grievance
attached to the Complaint. According to the grievance: Plaintiff
and three other inmates were supposed to be in bed, but
instead were up “horse playing.” (Doc. 1, p. 11).
A corrections officer caught them and made them begin to work
out. Id. At that point, Hubler entered,
“pinned an inmate against the wall and began to slap
him over and over.” Id. Hubler also said he
“wishes to take it back to the old days when they use
to beat our asses and didn't have to answer to
anybody.” Id. He then “smacked two other
inmates” and finally “smack[ed]” Plaintiff
and kicked his things across the room. Id.
seeks monetary damages from the defendants. (Doc. 1, p. 6).
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it
convenient to designate a single count in this pro
se action. The parties and the Court will use this
designation in all future pleadings and orders, unless
otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. The