United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. ROSENSTENGEL, CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Charles Day, who is civilly committed at Big Muddy
Correctional Center (“Big Muddy”) as a
“sexually dangerous person” (SDP), brings this
action for alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as denial of
accommodations in violation of the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42
U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and the Rehabilitation
Act (“RA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 794-94e. He
seeks declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.
case is now before the Court for preliminary review of the
Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. As a civilly
committed SDP under the Illinois Sexually Dangerous Persons
Act (“SDPA”) (725 ILCS 205/1.01), Day is subject
to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (28 U.S.C. § 1915
et. seq). See Kalinowski v. Bond, 358 F.3d
978, 978-79 (7th Cir. 2004). Under Section 1915A, the Court
is required to screen the Complaint to filter out
nonmeritorious claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Any portion
of the Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails
to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from
an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b). At this juncture, the factual allegations of the
pro se complaint are liberally construed.
Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816,
821 (7th Cir. 2009).
filed this action against Defendants in their official
capacities only. He asserts claims against Rob Jeffreys as
the Director of the Illinois Department of Corrections
(“IDOC”) and Day's legal guardian, Daniel
Sullivan as the Chief Administrative Officer of Big Muddy,
Jessica Stover as the SDP Program lead therapist and
Day's primary therapist, and Sarah Brown-Foiles as the
IDOC Coordinator of Sex Offender Programs. Day alleges that
Defendants, in their official capacities, have put in place
policies and practices which are inadequate for the treatment
of Day, as a civilly committed SDP.
Complaint alleges the following: Day has been a civilly
committed SDP for nearly 17 years under the SDPA and is
housed within Big Muddy, an IDOC facility. Day is currently
diagnosed with paraphilic disorder, personality disorder,
alcohol dependence, and poly-substance abuse. He was
“historically” diagnosed with learning, speech,
and comprehension disabilities.
literacy and learning disabilities have not been addressed by
staff, and he has never been offered individualized treatment
to assist him to effectively learn treatment concepts. Staff
have not made any attempt to address his mental health
issues. The entire SDP program is deficient and is not
calculated to actually treat any of its participants, but is
instead simply a prison term by another name - there is no
established curriculum, progress is judged solely by the
subjective judgment of staff, and staff persist with
ineffective treatment to the extent of failing to use any
professional judgment. The SDP treatment program is
underfunded, understaffed, inadequate, and punitive.
other SDPs are forced to live alongside convicted prisoners.
They are treated and held to a regimen that is identical to
the prisoners. The punitive environment does not comply with
the SDPA's stated purpose or its objective of care and
retaliates against participants who use the grievance process
in their semi-annual evaluations. Baldwin, as Day's legal
guardian, has failed to fulfill his duties in that role.
on the allegations in the Complaint, the Court divides this
action into the following claims:
Count 1:Defendants violated Day's rights under the
Fourteenth Amendment to receive treatment as a civilly
Count 2: Defendants violated Day's rights under the
Fourteenth Amendment to receive treatment for his mental
illnesses and disorders that led to his civil commitment.
Count 3: Defendants Sullivan, Brown-Foiles, and Jeffreys
violated Day's rights under the Fourteenth Amendment by
failing to adequately train or supervise their employees
regarding the proper care and treatment of a SDP with mental
illnesses or disorders.
Count 4: Defendants violated Day's rights under the
Fourteenth Amendment by subjecting him to a punitive
Count 5: ADA and RA claims for failure to accommodate
Day's learning and intellectual disabilities and for
denying adequate program funding, reasonable housing, and
access to programs.
Count 6: Defendant Stover violated Day's rights under the
First Amendment by retaliating against Day for his use of the
Count 7: State law claim for breach of fiduciary duty against
Count 8: The Illinois Sexually Dangerous Persons Act is