Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-00765 I . PACTS 1. Upon transfer of Petitioner into SCI-Camp Hill dated July 2, 1998, correctional guard "E. O'Connor" immediately confiscated and destroyed Petitioner's "personal property" absent affording Petitioner "due process" dated July 10, 1998. Petitioner filed a "DC-ADM 804 OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE" at SCI-Camp Hill requesting reimbursement of Three-Hundred and Fifty-Two Dollars ($352.00) da- ted July 15, 1998. Superintendent Kenneth D. Kyler (Respondent) denied Petitioner's DC-ADM 804 Grievance dated July 31, 1998. Pet- itioner filed his "Final Appeal" with the "CORC" in the "DOC" dat- ed August 14. 1998. Executive Deputy Commissioner Jeffrey A. Beard from "CORC" in the "DOC" granted Petitioner's "Final Appeal" by remanding the DC-ADM 804 Grievance back to SCI-Camp Hill to reimb- urse Petitioner dated September 18, 1998. ~ 2. Superintendent Kyler (Respondent) reimbursed Petitioner One-Hundred and Ninety-Four Dollars and Seventy-Seventy cent ~19~ 77~) dated October 19. 1998, while intentionally failing to reimb- urse Petitioner One-Hundred and FortY-Eight Dollars and Fifty cent ($148.50~) for Petitioner's "commissary items, AddidasSneakers, weightlifting belt, and return the "AC Adapter" to Petitioner's 'OPTIMA TV ANTENNA'" dated October 19, 1998. See hereto attached Petitioner's APPENDIX "A." 'I . 3. Petitioner filed an appeal to Superintendent Kyler (Respon- dent) and said appeal was denied by Superintendent Kyler (Respond- ent) dated October 22, 1998. See hereto attached Petitioner's APPENDIX "B.. 'I 2 4. Petitioner filed his final administrative appeal with the .CORC. in the .DOC" dated October 27, 1995~ Robert S. Bitner (Res- pondent), whom is the Chief Hearing Examiner in the .CORC. denied said appeal dated December 2, 1998; Petitioner came into receipt of said final .Order" denying said appeal dated December 2~ B9& ~ hereto attached Petitioner's APPENDIX .~." . II. ARGUMENT 5. MANDAMUS: AN EXTRAORDINARY REMEDY A. DEFINITION AND STATUTORY AUTHORITY The statutory authority for Mandamus is found in Pa.R.Civ.P. Rule 1095. This Court has original jurisdiction to hear actions brought to compel a office of the United States to perform his duty. Generally, Mandamus may be defined as a Command or Order is- suing from a court of law directed to some inferior court, agency, board, corporation, or person requiring performance of a particul- ar duty, which results from the official station of the party to whom the Writ is directed to from operation of positive law. See. HOLLOWAY. V. LEHMAN , Pa.Commonwealth Ct. , 671 A.2d 1179 (1996). 'I 6. The "Act of July 31,1970, P.L. 673, as amended, 17 P.S. S 211.101 et seq.," gives this Court original jurisdiction of all c- ivil actions. or proceedings against the Commonwealth or any .offi- cern thereof, acting in his official capacity. See 17 P.S. S 211.- 401 (BlIIpbasis added) . Also, this encompasses declaratory jUdgment 1. Superintendent Kyler (Respondent) gave Petitioner an additional $5L 7l~ from the commissary items while Petitioner's final appeal was pending with the .CORC~ dated 11/9/9S. See hereto attached Petitioner's (Exhibit "A"). 3 actions. See 42 Pa.C.S.A. S5761(a)(1), 761(b). DC-ADM 804 was promulgated pursuant to powers given the "DOC" by Pennsylvania's State law to prescribe rules and regulations. See 71 P.S. S 186. This Court is asked to take judicial notice of its contents. Also, the "DOC" ~nmate Grievance System' is established under 37 Pa. Code S 93.9, and the denial of Petitioner's "DC-ADM 804 Grievance Final Appeal" by the .CORC" is directly appealable as a matter of right in this Court. , 7. This Court defined the term .officer,. for jurisdictional purposes, as "those persons who perform state-wide policymaking functions and who are charged with the responsibility for indepen- dent initiation of administrative policy regarding some sovereign function for State government." Section IV(D) of the "DOC. Policy Statement No. DC-ADM 804, entitled "Consolidated Inmate Grievence Review System (Inmate Review System)," defines .CORC" as "[a] committee of at least three (3) Central Office staff appointed by the Commissioner of Corrections to include the commissioner~ Exec- utiveDeputy Commissioner and Chief Counselor their designees." Section IV(D) goes on to state that "CORC" shall have responsibil- ity for direct review of .all inmate appeals for Final Review." ( Emphasis added). Therefore: it is clear from these definitions th- at " CORC " functions on a state-wide level. '1 8. \: ,~ Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines policy as "a definite course or method of action selected (as by govern- ment, institution, group, or individual) from among alternatives 2. Subsequently the Commissioner of the .DOC" had his official title changed to .Secretary" in Pennsy- lvania in the year of 1997. 4 and in light of given conditions to guide and determine present and future decisions." See Webster Third New International Dictio- nary 1754 (1986). Section II of Policy Statement No. DC-ADM 804 states that it is the purpose of the Inmate Review System to "est- ablish pOlicy and ensure that inmates have an avenue through which resolution of specific problems can be sought. As the final level of review in the Inmate Review System "CORC" decisions guide and determine present and future resolution of inmate grievances. This is conclusive that decisions made by the "CORC" for the "DOC" det- ermine policy, which performs state-wide policymaking functions, consistently recognized by this Court, ergo, its decisions are SUbject to review in this Court's original jurisdiction. , IU. CLlUMS b 9. "DOC" guards do not have authority to confiscate and immed- iately destroy Petitioner's "personal property" absent affording Petitioner "due process," violating Pennsylvania law, federal law, and "DOC" pOlicy. See Pa. Canst. Art. 1 S 1: Art. 1 S lOr Art. 1 S 13: Art. 1 S 20: .Art. 1 S 26: First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States, and "DOC" DC-ADM 804 Polic~ "DOC" policy clearly asserts Petitioner can retain three (3) pairs of sneakers simUltaneously by "DC-ADM 815-4" effective date 5/27/ 97. See hereto attached Petitioner's (Exhibit "B"). While Petitio- ner's "Final Appeal" was pending with the "CORC," Sgt. Henney ver- ified Petitioner can retain three (3) pairs of sneakers simultane- OUSly by "DOC" pOlicy dated November 26, 1998. See hereto attached Petitioner's (Exhibit .C.). Also, "DOC" policy clearly asserts all items listed upon Petitioner's [DC-153 Personal Property Transfer 5 Sheet] Petitioner shall be permitted to retain at the new receivi- ng institution. as the following excerpt reveals: 8It is the responSibility of the sending insti- tution to inventory inmate property prior to transfer and ensure that it complies witb pol- icy. !nmate will be permitted to keep no-long- er-allowed property !! long !!! ~ Uem( S ~ ~ !:! noted on the inmate' s Personal Property !!!:: ventory (DC-lS3) as of the effective date of the revised DC-ADM 815, which was 12-28-92.8 Id., DC-ADM 815 (V) at 815-2, date of issue 10/10/96 by effective date 10/15/96, at Policy Number DC-ADM 815. , 10. Since Superintendent Kyler (Respondent) acknowledged SCI- Greene approved for Petitioner to retain hie "AC Adapter" to his .OPTIMA TV ANTENNA" with his three (3) pairs of sneakers as noted upon Petitioner's (DC-153 Personal Property Transfer Sheet) . dated I. July 2, 1998, APPENDIX 8~8 and APPENDIX 8~,8 all Respondents' had a duty to adhere/abide to "DOC" Policy DC-ADM 815 by returning the ~AC Adapter" back to Petitioner and reimburse Petitioner Seventy Dollars ($70.00) for Petitioner's "Addidas Sneakers" dated Decemb- er 2, 1998, APPENDIX .~:8 since DC-ADM 615 does not prohibit "AC Adapter" with a television antenna. Exhibit 8~.8 Respondents' fai- lure to adhere/abide to "DOC" Policy DC-ADM 615 was capricious and erroneously arbitrary as deliberate indifference to established _~ "DOC" policy; viOlating Petitioner's "due process" rights and gua- . rantee against cruel and unusual punishment. that joins these Res- pondents' in declaratory judgment action and being held pecuniari~ ly liable for damages for violating Petitioner's constitutional rights. See Pa. Conat. Art. 1 $ 13; Pa.C.B.A. 55 7531-7541: 42. U.S.C.A.S 1983. 6 11. Petitioner took his weightlifting belt from transfer from SCI-Huntingdon to SCI-Greene dated June 19, 1996. Petitioner is not responsible for Respondents errors by not keeping accurate re- cords from transfers, that resulted in Superintendent Kyler's (Re- spondent's) erroneous fact-finding, APPENDIX a~,a that Robert S. Bitner (Respondent) failed to check into. "CORC" Robert S. Bitner (Respondent) had a duty to reimburse Petitioner Twenty-Six Dollars and Seventy-Nine cent 1$26.79~) for Petitioner's weightlifting be- It. Petitioner apprised Respondents' during all appeals that Peti- tioner's television antenna will not work absent its "AC Adapter" that came with the antenna, by attaching the antenna's instruction sheet to Petitioner's appeals address to them~ See hereto attach- ed Petitioner's (Exhibit aDa). f IV. REMEDIES 12. Petitioner is seeking declaratory, pecuniary, and injunct- ive relief by a .ORDERa from this Court aIN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. directing Respondents' to reimburse Petitioner Ninety-Six Dollars and Seventy-Nine cent ($96.79~) for Petitioner's "Addidas Sneaker~ weightlifting belt, and the return of the "AC Adapter" to Petitio- ner's 'OPTIMA TV ANTENNA.' DC-ADM 804 Inmate Grievance System st- atas Petitioner can seek compensatory relief from violations of "DOC" policy, Petitioner complied with this "DOC" pOlicy by reque- 3. Superintendent Kyler (Respondent) acknowledged DC-ADM 815. permits a television set to be acceptable at any institution, APPENDIX "B." THERBFORE~ all parts of the -TV antenna which includes its aAC Adapter" to the ;.antenna must be acceptable as well since its part of the tslevision set.. Exhibit a~ a 7 sting a total reimbursement of Three-Hundred and Fifty-Two Dollars ($352.00) inside Petitioner's original DC-ADM B04 OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE dated July 10-15, 199B. Black's Law Dictionary defines "compensatory," as "pay, make amends, to make a party whole monet- arily." Petitioner has suffered deprivations in money/property, as well as emotional and mental stress from Respondents' illegal/ unlawful praotice. In this instant matter Petitioner has proven Respondents' have failed in their duty to "fully compensate Petit- ioner," and Petitioner has a right to expect the 'DOC. Respondents to abide by its own "DOC" policy. Petitioner has no other adequate and appropriate remedy except to appeal to this Court, for this Court to compel Respondents' to fulfill their duty. , CONCLUSION WHBREPORB. for the above-stated facts and reasons, Petitioner prays this Honorable Court shall issue a .ORDSR. directing Respon- dents' to immediately pay Petitioner Ninety-Six Dollars and Seven- ty-Nine cent ($96.79*) and return the "AC Adapter" from Petitione- r's 'OPTIMA TV ANTENNA" back to Petitioner, from their failure to adhere/abide by "DOC" policy in violation of Petitioner's constit- utional.rights. Respectfully submitted. Byl '\ ,~l;'\:\~", ~). ~.J"\."'"'>..,..''-''' CIlrtiu S. Brandon AP-2332 P.O. Box 999. 1120 Pike St. Huntingdon. PA. 16652 Petitioner. e2 !!!! Date: Dec:ember 30, 1998 8 ( "t..:' DC-ADM 815 (revised 2/97) .- RadiolTelevision Combination; radio will be AM or AM/FM cassette player o:tly, battery and/or AC operated with earphones. Clocks. alarms, CB, weather, shortwave. public service bands. recording capability and outside purchase of cassette tapes not permitted. Television set will have maximum screen size of thirteen inches measured diagonally, .38 amps or 46 watts average power drain. Inmates who choose to purchase combination units will not be permitted any other radio or television sels; (limit 1) The Commissary shall meter (check) the wattage draw of all new incoming television sets. Any television being transferred from ona correctional Institution to another shall be deemed acceptable; Religious items; in accordance with OC-ADM 819 and D.O.C. policy 7.5.1, and reviewed by the religious coordinator. Sandals; (limit 1 pair) Shirts or Blouses; wa~hab/e unlined only. white only. Females must be ai/east . waist-length, alleast 3".sleeves, no tank tops, no strepless; (limit 4) Shoes; dress or worn, maximum height of 6" measured from inside to top of shoe, maximum heel height of 11/4", no steel toes, no metal buckles, streps, catches, pocket or fur linings, maximum $100.00; (limit 2 pair) Sneakers or Tennis Shoes; air pumps and removable air pockets prohibited. Maximum $80.00 per pair, for leisure activities only; (limit 3 pair in any 12 month period). Pull:hase must be made by the inmate through established Institution procedures from a vendor approved by the Institution or a recognized catalog. Slippers; shoe or sock type; (limit 1 pair) Television: up to 13" screen, black and white or color with earphone, 46 walts, .38 amps, average power drain, on screen clock acceptable: Oimit 1). Remote control units will be sent out at the inmate's expense. The Commissary shall meter (check) tl)e wattage draw of all new incoming television sets, Any television being. transferred from one correctional institution to another shall be deemed acceptable. . Television antenna; if approved by Institution, indoor, $25.00 maximum; (limit t) Thermal underwear; thermal knit type, no insulated underwear - white only, (limit 3 pair) Typewriters; portable, manual, battery operated or electric, AC adapters permitted, maximum $350.00. Must be shipped directly from vendor, use regular (no thermal) typing paper, use only A.A, C. 0 or 9 volt size batteries available in commissary, replacement typewriter ribbons/cartridges may be ordered from vendor. Although typewriters with memory are permitted, the Department prohibits the storing of Information. Inmates who acquire tyP'llwriters are to be Informed that the Department reserves ttie right . to temporarily remove the batteries, and thus eliminate any stored. Information. The following options or accessories are not permitted: 1. Computer Interface andlor extemal printer components (the term "computer interface" includes built-in and external modems) 2. External disk drives. Underwear; shorts brief or boxer type, washable male only - white, (limit 6 pair I total) T-shirts; any styie, no logos permitted, no mesh, females - no tank tops. white. only (limit 6) Waist shaper; (limit 1) Watch; $50.00 maximum, time, day and date feature only; (limit 1) \i\'::t""'~ ~.::II.~Hic.c: ' . .. FEB 1 0 199~j . 99- 7?-5 . . I IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA CURTIS E. BRANDON, Petitioner v. MARTIN HORN et al., Respondents No. ~~ M.n. 1999 PER CURIAM ORnER NOW, January 8, 1999, upon consideration of petitioner's petition for review, and it appearing that petitioner seeks money damages for a tort action, and that this matter is not within this court's. original jurisdiction, Balshy v. Rank, 507 Pa. 384, 490 A.2d 415 (1985) iFawber v. Cohen, 516 Pa. 352, 32 A.2d 429 (1987), this matter is transfarred to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. The Chief Clerk shall certify a photocopy of the .docket entries of the above matter and the record to the Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. CERTIFIED FROM THE RECORD AND ORDER EXIT JAN 11 1999 C'1l. ~ (l 7- I'leputy Prothonotary - Chlete/erk ~ If) ;:: - -, ,,- 0 c~, ~::>< UJ_". ~:s ~'~ ~c~ ...:.... ,.c:L. CL ';.:~:::':; ~I-- ":~:~~ ~} c 0"' ' cc :::Je- I r I'~ "-;';' u:LL1 ro ini.i:1 i:!:~ I.cJ 8.J[1- u- ,.~;: .<- I.L en ::) 0 0' 0 , , '\ .!,t' ,/:' >- l.n , .. a; _"1 !:,: p 0? i>, UJ!;;? Ot"5' ) .~ 8=-L: Q. ::"j ~8 >- en :'~<:'~ D:: I WClM. '-f~ - ". rIlU co tnfi:i . iE' W U"J::l.. u... "",- .' u.. G'l ::) 0 c" U IN THE COURT OF COMMON PC.EAS CURTIS E. BRANDON, : Petitioner . . . . V. . . . MARTIN HORN, et al., . . Respondents' . : OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY 9 9 -'f"',~ CIVIL DI.YIS~ON . Ih Oil/it MAR .L 0 /999P/ . No. 11 M.D. 1999 from THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PA. PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE STATUS OF No. 11 M.D. 1999 THAT WAS TRANSFERRED TO THIS COURT BY THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DATED 1/8/1999 AND NOW. comes. your pro ~ Petitioner, Curtis E. Brandon, who files the above said motion for clarification of the status of his petition which THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA had transfe- ( rred to this Court regarding "No. 11 M.D. 1999" dated 1/8A999, and pr..en" the fOl1~in:~CEDURAL HISTORY I FACTS :i::;~,~lil 1. Petitioner initiated this civil action by filing a Writ Of". .:. :.' ':. ,lIlt: :::::mue wit. THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PEN'SYLVANIA .et"Jigj!t~l\~~~ 2. THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA issued an "ORDER~,"<;ti:i "'C. '" ,,:'.;,: -,:,-,::),:{,{~~~);.\~~~.;' transfer this civil action to this Court by its "ORDER" datEi~';:!', 1999. See hereto attached Petitioner's APPENDIX "A." .- 3. As of this date Petitioner has not heard anything Court regarding how Petitioner should proceed nor the his petition. REQUEST Will this Court kindly advise Petitioner of the and status of this matter in this Court's jurisdiction... ,'", <\~;" Respectfullysubl1lf,' , .' ." ~.- ;,;', By: Date: February 12, 1999 Brandon'.. . DV 2954 . .'.,;.:})) - ,'.",: ""';'''''~'',<, . P.O. Box 999,1120.';( Huntingdon, PA.16~,'. Pet1t1.0ner. pro!!.,,~ ; ,,',",':)~:t PLeAS OF CU1'lBeltLI\ND COUN'rlr CURTIS E. BRANDON, : CIVIL DIVISION Petitioner . . . . V. I No. 11 M.D. 1999 from I THE COMMONweALTH COURT OF PA. MARTIN HORN, et a1., . . Respondents I ~!!!.!.~!.~TION OF ~Y!.!:~ I, Curtis E. Brandon. Petitioner, hereby certify that on Febru- ary 12, 1999, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document entitled "PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE STATUS OF No. 11 M.D. 1999 THAT WAS TRANSFERRED TO THIS CO~ aRT BY THE COMMONWEALTH COURrOF peNNSYLVANIA DATED 1/8/1999" by deP9siting same into the United States Mail, First-class, postage prepaid, to the person listed below as follows: Secretary Martin F. Horn P.O. BOK 598 'Camp Hill, PA. 17001-0598 ___s,'~ .v~~._ Curtis E. Brandon . Petitione~ pro ~ 2