Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-1717a m m N O O o R m d o D o m e ?' ? o e e e ? ?..? q'p 2 4 _ w d V_f <Z )Z> 4e nee, 4 -IL--VN 4L cac Coe- qci-tv-'? Q)r-- rr? a? ca p- - r ! ? b 4? ? -?'y \ v e +C, l-- +i?- ? G ? o ? ?,•?,? rain... at 'Z- l ?-- 01* 3 ? P 1) ks ` A-A-x3 k A=) AA to ?n? Z P ?? Q Qsp? 16"nLL&L? JZL"k- r r -, F Cl Ln .' INNATE # : BT 72 63 NAME: CIVIL ACTION #: ALFONSO PEW I certify that this report is an accurate reflection of the subject's inmate account activity and balance for the preceding months. S T Lisa Clinger, ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT-SCI-SMITHFIELD/SCI-HUNTINGDON, HUNTINGDON, PA DATE : 0 ; Integrated Offender Case Management System Offender Transaction History From Date: 08/01/2011 To Date: 02/02/2012 Sort By: Transaction Date - DESC 2/2/2012 1:09:22 PM Iclinger Offender ID: 6879AT Case ID: BT7263 Offender Name: PEW, ALFONSO Location: JAB-101'1-01 Escrow Balance: 0.00 Current Balance: -156.70 Institution: Smithfield SMI-012501 02101/2012 37 - Postage -0.65 -156.70 First Class Mail SMI-012482 01/30/2012 36 - Library Copies -0.30 -156.05 SMI-012445 01/24/2012 37- Postage -2.30 -155.75 First Class Mail SMI-012416 01/19/2012 37 - Postage -1.48 -153.45 First Class Mail SMI.012370 01/11/2012 36 - Library -Copies -3.90 -151.97 SMI-012368 01/11/2012 37 - Postage -0.64 -148.07 First Class Mail SMI-012294 01/01/2012 13 - Personal `Gifts +80.00 -147.43 COOPER, MARK SMI-012290 12/30/2011 36 - Copies -0.10 -227.43 IGWF SMI-012256 12/23/2011 ' 36 - Library Copies -2.90 -227.33 SMI-012203 12/16/2011 37 - Postage_ -1.28 -224.43 First Class Mail SMI-012197 12/15/2011 36 - Library Copies -1.40 -22115 SMI-012194 12/15/2011 37 - Postage -0.64 -221.75 First Class Mail SMI-012160 12/09/2011 37 - Postage -1.28 -221.11 First Class Mail' SMI-012148 12/08/2011 37 - Postage -1.28 -219.83 First Class Mail SMI-012148 12/08/2011 37 - Postage -2.75 -218.55 First Class Mail SMI-012118 12/05/2011 37 - Postage -1.88 -215.80 First Class Mail SMI-011952 11/09/2011 37 - Postage -1.68 -213.92 First Class Mail - SMI-011943 11/09/2011 37 - Postage -2.08 -212.24 First Class Mail SMI-011943 11/09/2011 37 - Postage -1.48 -210.16 First Class Mail SMI-011901 11/03/2011 37 - Postage -3.28 -208.68 First Class-Mail` SMI-011901 11/03/2011 37 - Postage -1,68 -205.40 First Class Mail SMI-011862 10/31/2011 36 - Library Copies -0.50 -203.72 SMI-011862 10/31/2011 36 - Library Copies -1.90 -203.22 SMI-011851 10/28/2011 37 - Postage -1.88 -201.32 First Class Mail SMI-011800 10/21/2011 37 - Postage -2.08 -199.44 First Class Mail SMI-011780 10/18/2011 37 - Postage -1.68 -197.36 first Class Mail SMI-011780 10/18/2011 37 - Postage -1.28 -195.68 First Class. Mail SMI-011780 10/18/2011 37 - Postage -1.68 -194.40 First Class Mail SMI-011696 10/05/2011 36 - Library Copies -0.50 -192.72 SMI-011667 09/30/2011 36 - Library Copies -7.00 -192.22 SMI-011667 09/30/2011 36 - Library Copies -2.50 -185.22 SMI-011666 09/30/2011 37 - Postage -1.08 -182.72 Page 1 of 2 G Integrated Offender Case Management System 2/2/2012 1:09:22 PM Offender Transaction History Iclinger From Date: Sort By: 08/01/2011 To Date: 02/02/2012 Transaction Date - DESC SMI-011643 09/28/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011643 09/28/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011562 09/15/2011 36 - Library Copies SMI-011520 09/09/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011509 09108/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011488 09/06/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011262 08/05/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011249 08/04/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011249 08/04/2011 37 - Postage SMI-011249 08/04/2011 37 - Postaae -0.64 -0.64 -0.20 -2.75 -2.24 -1.48 -1.68 -2.08 -1.88 -1.68 -181.64 First Class Mail -181.00 first Class Mail -180.36 -180.16 First Class Mail -177.41 First Class Mail -175.17 First Class Mail -173.69 First Class Mail -172.01 First Class Mail -169.93 First Class Mail -168.05 First Class Mail Page 2 of 2 Q ?aC? .? ry)o (Alt t cc PA, ? C? 6 -cl?t iA W op c) ?? Ellt s .? e C d 1 1, ?? : 10E? FJ, O• e ?;, cRef?e .2?cf v i a 'a 7/7 t7 ?^? ?.1 C7 C b(z) Pc 1-4 , , V4, ?Z6 cc_ C L?1 R 'C o Cl, .,?, ??4 Z ??-al ? C??.t??)-? ?<.t,?'-? ?'9EZc ? G ? C ?c?v?,( ? rrfc*x;i Iz- Ric, c-? ? C•-"''' ?5.:_C? `°-7 Nl L ? ? e- c? S`s qzc?zL e -L (off ?y\ ?f /-\• ,. ism is i FT, t V 1 i c fz- ??? ?,? i My ?? ?c?.'``e' L vc,,s,?? Z> Pa. 19 c C L4 c,: • ?? Bet, ?._?, 2-1 ?? ?° ??Ls '4`• ? CSC; ? ?? ????_ ? ? ?J ?'????? ? ????-,?-, (\., C-IT CIL _ l v (C7 V? c' AA C Cj? C C_ V-Jcz ?41. v n r?? ? ?..Me? e V AP, ?, ?? `- ? ?.-.> ?•?? ?. !??. f LCD c?? C., ? -' , C-?-? ? ? ? ,? 2' ? ???,°, I/ . J " ic- C-1 ?P N SC ., ?C (?fc Cc ac rL c .p L.k ti C --?' ?. p CJ? E ? c a PY-1 7a .w - 4 A- CXA rz:> c.:?t- ?s z ZION 'A. C?-e((f?*CN4 w ?? P-? cci Cam" 'BVA IT Qq C- LC D, &I c C) C-e cy? CJ e cc cy, C' J' 1 wL ? _ k?(r?..J ck-z ate . C-) C-1 pe- PlAe ??yf 9 k-_? C! c (y\A tom) c?\ cvC-- . ,G's" 37 (??.?v( A:,-j Ca\A (` c-? fC?2 Ceti co PCB CF 3 6Q) (C"6 ?- mac,,{- w' 549 6AZ-, cgs %4--? -'-? c4A/ ms" r Ndw, %4p 'Leli >s c1;So3 ?- '? CN J „l -tt yr ocj c q 1. ?? ., ?- `?:?; ?? ????-? ? ?? t? rte, -eA b(?-Q,x C`_' C, ?C Mme,, gyp` . a LAP UAJ ?-? Gc) ?JC L`v Ct) Y C'e? male ?'?1, ??> ? Cam. ,.?,?,?? ? - ??., ??=?1,?? \-N3 c Q?Nj 3Q, ?_ `e ms -c Z!-1 y ee 17, RQ) k C- -"-r. Ck? C'Cn ZCA? CC cc?) a CA_ "?l( /IVIa(c c kCQQ2 ( t C. 6-, ( •? ?,?,? (= e ?t C)-- , " ? -) Ri (r, ZIP c k, Cc-Ili ?lj (Ct-e,, ?--? sae C? ?`?'? a ?-J cc? 1/?,cI`?,, /AVX cl, ?-? -*? PTIZ CA_ ??) PI ??Cc? a -,4,. ;fir Q L- ??cf Vic' . a? C, C? C)-P C?ce oz- ?' ?? - • 6cl . ZY c-k 2s • u , cce CAS ?? ?'.'` 3 ?i Q? ?? `ems t ??l ry P1,c?Co ,z c I.x; ce 4+1P lil/ C-C P- s. 16 -ck t , P 8, 26 Ct C) t? s t c. Z C_ ~' t Z ?d ?t"Rem U cr) f? IF rl Re?(cafc?ec II ?? w? G 1-, ?C '?s?' ? t t ' `?`? UGC C cr?,c??Z? ? u- rz 4 u Ica ?cC+Ae.e- aac ;?( (?.?? (mot ?? G ,J cc e,.z d i' . Ce .? cs? 47-1 C?, AA eA -jQ C-)f Cek??c Cr kAPe- r ?je ? • Cat 6c> ?z - & `aS c CSC 7 I p- k: ?k'.: P r e cc w? M •?ZC CA C-- ??•vE?vC?F v??c ,JET ?,s ?w h C t??? f-ems s? e. ( C, h z?, eec?c Q.?_c_C? c? v kC v? cite6-1? EJUJ? Piz J ?Z V C? C? J IN---e c_C C zc t c! ?1 Z L e(S' Q, c (t CQ v c? zvC? ?C(t colt„ ?,-- tZC ';__ ?e C-£ C 42 K,<lpe? A.rk Ge? C"j?? s ? v 1 L) 1 C N3 c ^,j P z Z!?c PC c ?? bra---? Cc? h C?P C-o C? cz? 0 C-' C-1 IC-1 C rr 6c?Nj --ro, cj- oc CLAA;?6C?E be-az- clce?< C"p Opa RAZ fat?.? TCNJQ,?? c-e ,??r? sc. AN 1?r2 V C?E ? z?- ? l? +;;s Pu>.? ?6, Rack ??ze? . SEHU-KESSA SAA TABANSI a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., DEFENDANTS 12-1717 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of May, 2012, Plaintiff, Sehu-Kessa Saa Tabansi, a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew's pro se Complaint purports to be a federal civil rights action, accordingly, this court lacks jurisdiction over the matter and the Complaint is DISMISSED. By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. ? Sehu-Kessa Saa Tabansi a/k/a , Alfonso Percey Pew, BT-7263 ?- -- SCI Frackville M , 1111 Altamont Blvd. r Frackville, PA 17931-2699 "' 1 r-.: .cam -+c r :saa 000 Kct. (erg -v -7;:6?? t ?. 4 Lie A?r-> s C-> P ?A Prr r J C5 14111 I-A CQA? L TIn ? 7?jso I IZ:( e c, f-c?', f t ?rs k-Sl C, c t CCU CC-P --??? A Mk N.?SC2 Z.v ?Z C? C E 1 .? '? °^? ; SEHU KESSA SAA TABANSI, a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, PLAINTIFF V. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 12-1717 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 29th day of May, 2012, Plaintiff shall file and serve a copy in the chambers of this judge a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal within twenty-one (21) days of this date. By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. Sehu Kessa Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, BT7263 SCI Frackville 1111 Altmont Blvd. Frackville, PA 17931-2699 = .a :saa CCPy ,.-5. ?. - C - c.:r SEHU KESSA SAA TABANSI, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFF V. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DEFENDANT 12-1717 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 29th day of May, 2012, Plaintiff's application for leave to appeal in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Sehu Kessa Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, BT7263 SCI Frackville 1111 Altmont Blvd. Frackville, PA 17931-2699 :saa r7 fed s%3?/,? By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. - Ali. Tr--'E C?? ?N\Q,ti PL A S C-k cc,?-) fl-3 4 t? (- ? z, , " Ile't" .s Liz G Se 0 e z( t f' C.G ?cj. ? e e ? ?Z c•\j ?\ bCVC?M2S1?.# G? ?2?C C? 2 ? 1 ,r C-? Tb Z? t GR4- LIE- N 1?!o is I I m in T NN/ K e ? S ?e V ylL \31 Y ?., ?? ?_ r tr -_'> L a L 3D:f -3 C-V C- 3?0 ?- o n" 2 ? s o ?S cD Zi S2 c'D --- c `Ny 2 0(y Z? SNP ?? C?2 ??J VVY SEHU-KESSA SAA TABANSI a/k/a IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALFONSO PERCY PEW, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFF V. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., DEFENDANTS 12-1717 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of June, 2012, the "PRO SE MOTION RECONSIDERATION ALTER AMEND JUDGMENT AND RE INSTATE SERVICE OF COMPLAINT WITH IN 30 DAYS," filed by Sehu-Kessa Saa Tabansi, a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew is DENIED. By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. ? Sehu-Kessa Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percey Pew, BT-7263 SCI Frackville 1111 Altamont Blvd. Frackville, PA 17931-2699 -, :saa P y ma, ?V MC ?? .: . -< = cn r C.; - CLommouWealtb Court of Veunsprbanta Kristen W. Brown Prothonotary Michael Krimmel, Esq. Chief Clerk of Commonwealth Court July 12, 2012 NOTICE OF DOCKETING APPEAL RE: Tabanski et al v. DOC et al 1153 CD 2012 Filed Date: May 22, 2012 Trial Court Docket No: BT-7263 12-1717 Pennsylvania Judicial Center 601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 2100 P.O. Boa 69185 Harrisburg. PA 17106-9185 ,dry. w .pacc?irts. u?-. M C- i FT7 C... r` _1 cn c:,: C- A Notice of Appeal from an order of your court has been docketed in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. The Commonwealth Court docket number must be on all correspondence and documents filed with the court. Under Chapter 19 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Notice of Appeal has the effect of directing the Court to transmit the certified record in the matter to the Prothonotary of the Commonwealth Court. The complete record, including the opinion of the trial judge, should be forwarded to the Commonwealth Court within sixty (60) days of the date of filing of the Notice of Appeal. Do not transmit a partial record. Pa.R.A.P. 1921 to 1933 provides the standards for preparation, certification and transmission of the record. The address to which the Court is to transmit the record is set forth on the next page of this notice. NOTICE TO COUNSEL A copy of this notice is being sent to all parties or their counsel indicated on the proof of service accompanying the Notice of Appeal. The appearance of all counsel has been entered on the record in the Commonwealth Court. Counsel has thirty (30) days from the date of filing of the Notice of Appeal to file a praecipe to withdraw their appearance pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 907 (b). Appellant or Appellant's attorney should review the record of the trial court, in order to insure that it is complete, prior to certification to this Court. (Note: A copy of the Zoning Ordinance must accompany records in Zoning Appeal cases). The addresses to which you are to transmit documents to this Court are set forth on the next page of this Notice. If you have special needs, please contact this court in writing as soon as possible. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Suzanne Noelle Hueston, Esq. Mr. H. Clifford O'Hara James C. Barnacle Mr. Kurt Granlund Shirly M. Smeal Dr. Jeffrey A. Beard, Ph.D. B (Brian) Thompson Ms. Grove Department of Corrections R. (Robert) Marsh Lieutenant Kensanger Correctional Officer Gilliam Correctional Officer Smith Correctional Officer Ryder Correctional Officer Taylor Major of Unit Managers Morris Marirosa Lamas Dorina Varner Franklin D. Tennis Lieutenant Barnes John Wetzel C. Graw Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Appellee Address all written communications to: Office of the Chief Clerk Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Judicial Center 601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 2100 P.O. Box 69185 Harrisburg, PA 17106-9185 (717) 255-1650 Filings may be made in person at the following address (except on Saturdays. Sundays a holidays observed by Pennsylvania Courts) between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Office of the Chief Clerk Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Judicial Center 601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 2100 P.O. Box 69185 Harrisburg, PA 17106-9185 (717) 255-1650 Pleadings and similar papers (but not paperbooks or certified records) may also be filed person only at: Office of the Chief Clerk Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania Filing Office Suite 990 The Widener Building 1339 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 496-4980 The hours of the Philadelphia Filing Office are 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Under Pa.R.A.P. 3702, writs or other process issuing out of the Commonwealth Court shall only from the Harrisburg Office. 1 SEHU KESSA-SAA TABANSI a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, PLAINTIFF V. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., DEFENDANTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 12-1717 CIVIL TERM IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO PENNSYLVANIA RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 1925 Masland, J., September 7, 2012:-- Plaintiff, Sehu Kessa-Saa Tabansi, a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, representing himself,' appeals this court's order dismissing his suit against the Defendant, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiff complains of the following matters on appeal: 1. Federal law 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed in State Court is subject to Concurrent Jurisdiction. 2. Common Pleas Court must entertain 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as a duty of upholding federal law Constitution under Concurrent Jurisdiction. 3. Civil Rights Actions is action in nature of trespass. 4. Precedent Cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and Commonwealth Court. Concise Statement, filed June 11, 2012 (citations omitted). Plaintiff, who is incarcerated, alleges numerous instances of retaliatory conduct against him by prison staff. He contends that this conduct violates his civil rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and that this court is the appropriate venue to prosecute his case. ' Both the underlying complaint and the instant appeal are hand written and barely legible. The court has tried to decipher Plaintiff's pleadings as best it can, but there are limits to our abilities in this regard. 12-1717 CIVIL TERM Based on Plaintiffs largely unintelligible complaint and less than cogent legal reasoning, this court submits that the appropriate tribunal to hear this case is a Federal District Court. If Plaintiffs Complaint presents a cognizable federal 1983 claim, then jurisdiction is appropriate in a federal court. To present such a claim, the court looks to two essential elements: (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Jones v. Clark, 607 F. Supp. 251, 254 (D.C. Pa. 1984). Here, Plaintiff complains of the ,actions of prison officials acting in their official capacities, whom it is well settled are acting under the color of state law. Id. As to the second element, the plaintiff must establish the existence of a protected life, liberty, or property interest, and the deprivation of that protected interest by state action. Id. Here, Plaintiff, inter alia, alleges the "taking of legal material, religious items, cultural and political property including hygien [sic] articles." Compl. at 135. As such, he has alleged the deprivation of material protected by the First Amendment of the federal Constitution by prison staff. Thus, it appears Plaintiff has pleaded the requisite facts to establish federal court jurisdiction of his claim. Accordingly, this court's order dismissing Plaintiffs Complaint should be affirmed. In conclusion, this court has endeavored to properly analyze Plaintiffs claims, such as they are, but as a pro se litigant, Plaintiff has assumed the risk -2- 12-1717 CIVIL TERM that his pleadings will be facially inadequate, or as here, largely unintelligible. And so, having filed a Complaint that appears to this court to be a federal civil rights action, proper jurisdiction lies in a Federal District Court rather than the Court of Common Pleas and this court did not err entering an order of dismissal. By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. Sehu Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percey Pew, BT-7263 SCI Frackville 1111 ,Altamont Blvd. Frackville, PA 17931-2699 OJ ? :saa M ?. ?u Zc?r?rie Noel(e ues+on, &6 C'? N G% W C6 rte, , _ - i C.-J -3- r IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi, Appellant V. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Jeffrey A. Beard Secretary of Corrections, Shirly M. Smeal Secretary of Corrections, John Wetzel Secretary of Corrections, lei Dorina Varner Chief Grievance Officer, H. Clifford O'Hara, Director, James C. Barnacle Director, s Franklin D. Tennis, -- B.(Brian) Thompson, R. (Robert) Marsh, Ms. Grove, C. Graw, Kurt : Granlund Unit Manager, Lieutenant Barnes, Lieutenant Kensanger, Correctional Officer Gilliam, Correctional Officer Smith, Correctional Officer Ryder, Correctional Officer Taylor, Major Morris of Unit Managers, and No. 1153 C.D. 2012 Marirosa Lamas Submitted: March 8, 2013 BEFORE: HONORABLE BERNARD L. McGINLEY, Judge HONORABLE MARY HANNAH LEAVITT, Judge HONORABLE ANNE E. COVEY, Judge OPINION NOT REPORTED MEMORANDUM OPINION BY JUDGE McGINLEY FILED: April 9, 2013 Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi (Pew) appeals the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County (common pleas court) that dismissed Pew's complaint based upon the common pleas court's determination that it lacked jurisdiction. {Jn March 19, 2012, Pew, an inmate hoed in a P' Sylvania Department of Corrections' (DOC) facility, commenced an action,ia,-the,,,qqpWp pleas court against IBC and nineteen of its employ. from tlxe to individual corrections officers. Pew alleged that he was in continuous, imminent danger of serious bodily and physical ham as a result of harassment and retaliation by the named defendants. Pew specifically alleged tom. 4*04wits blocked the preparation and filing of lawsuits, refused to mail legWpapers, took his legal materials, confiscated religious, cultural, and political VS00,40Y "'a access to law books and legal assistance. Few alleged-that the vason for dwis v as the desire of:DOC officials to prevent Pew from'e abuse by DOC officials to the public. To that ends, Pew4lw allopdr, officials isolated `m in "super maximum se fim" communicating,and corresponding with the public. In the complaint, Pew also detailed a list of gri v yes, fir W-14c h. be exhausted administrative remedies, fbtretaliatory,conduct whereby l 6 Officials, denied him.the use of a stapla to,asipmWeAceilAm, poly: . violated his religious beliefs a . t r aw un hirt and socks on his way to shower, for retaliatory conduct which denied,d the use of the library, for a DOC policy which limited the anent of 'l"an may send per month, retaliatory co#4Wt . which denied him " c `" fox retaliatory conduct ttt a # ,;scr to vision, � ;;ial cif two "legal" typ w t s, t)ewriter rid *_ PA.: :�; his se Edon cell and *w y/ of r to P1491k j top, a placement in a special cell with a mom apertUxp6 O a"d; ..: of" 04" 2 for his feet, the denial of grievance forms, unsafe bird feces and dangerous ground paving in the segregated exercise yard, for DOC employees abusing authority by lying on reports, fabricating misconducts, and playing repeated tape recordings over the cell intercom system to harass Pew, for a correctional officer banging a cell door to harass him, for DOC allowing a correctional officer to sexually stalk him, for confiscating personal property including legal materials, religious items, and cultural and political property including hygiene articles, for grievances concerning religious practice, bed sheets, cell ventilation, and medical care and treatment. Pew made claims under the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions. With respect to the Pennsylvania Constitution, Pew made claims based on Article I, Section I concerning the possession and protection of legal, cultural, political, and religious property; Article 1, Section 2, concerning the right to safety; Article 1, Section 3, concerning the right to religious freedom; Article 1, Section 7, concerning the right to write and address any subject; Article 1, Section 11, concerning the right of access to courts; Article 1, Section 13, concerning cruel punishment; Article 1, Section 20, concerning redress against DOC without fear of reprisal and retribution; and Article 1, Section 26, concerning the violation of civil rights. He made non-constitutional claims of intentional malicious conduct and intentional infliction of emotional distress. He further alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Pew sought the following relief- 59. . . . . 3 (a) A declaratoxy ju4gwnt . . . that the acts on Ale d in .. , onais i Coati , (h) A P� � , Defendants [DOC] to ex � P��t� Pew) Fill ± rt3 ►p. .; and 1rassnt, (c) Compensoxy Damages for the amount of $25,,00 each defendant separately and jointly for retaliatory conduct of Plainrif [Pew) for activism against DOC oafs; (d) Punitive Damages for the amount of $54,000 each defendant separately and jointly for violation of rights [for]the a t. (e)Jury Trial demand on all claims. (f)Plaintiff[Pew] cost of suit and litigation cost:_ ( ) l W Wtbe C s:-fl , r_ anal. eq to r _ ;40#7 ] rights Compla t, March, 19,;20-12,;ParsympkNo. a 9 at 12. Along with the Cow t, Pew filed an A ffiWavit of Imm- tit, . Danger of Serious ,BWHy and,,�,Physical Ham m, which be he was in imnuneat d=W of � ae transferred to a "SUWI, Unit with no exercise or showers since July 2411. He hadw, asse4lpd, that he suffered from hypertension and was de ` � s,,.. ,. � Pew also asserted that he suffered from "sciatica nerve ,Vie, sciatica, and il* disc" aid was denied medication as well as other healtliaids. AffWavit of f M amt r 4 of Serious Bodily and Physical Harm, January 31, 2012, (Affidavit), Paragraph F at 16. Pew also asserted that he was subjected to the following: (1) Torture Chair (8 hours) (2) Torture Cell #1 and#2 (21 days) (3) Torture RACC Belt(2 times) (4) Torture Food Loaf(2 times) x (7 days) (5) Denial Food Trays (4 times) Affidavit, Paragraph G at 16. He also alleged that DOC officers used another inmate who was a sexual predator to sexually harass him and make physical threats of violence against him. He alleged that his complaints about this treatment led to retaliatory discipline. Pew also applied for in forma pauperis status. By order dated May 9, 2012, the common pleas court dismissed the complaint on the basis that the complaint purported to be a federal civil rights action for which the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction. The common pleas court determined: If Plaintiffs [Pew] Complaint presents a cognizable federal 1983 claim, then jurisdiction is appropriate in a federal court. To present such a claim, the court looks to two essential elements: (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. . . . . Here, Plaintiff [Pew] complains of the actions of prison officials acting in their official capacities, whom it is well settled are acting under the color of state law. . . . 5 As to the second. element, the plaliAtiff [Pew] must establish the existence of a protected life, H or property inte r the;4 iv ,W" , ation, of 1W p d interest by state action. . . . Here, Plaintif,. alleles the 'taking of l "` , items, cultural and political pp hY }: sic] ;E articles.'. . . . As su�c , he of material protected by the „ .. , ` w Constitution by prison. staf. "bus, it €ff [Pew] has pleaded the requisite facts to establish federal court jurisdiction of his claim. Accordingly, this ccwnt's order dismissing Plaintiffs [Pew] Complaint should be affirmed. In conclusion, this court has endeavored to properly analyzePlaintiffs [ ] claims, suchlasthey. arei.but.as a pro se litig,W, Plaintiff(Pew) has assuv4edlho ris t1 at his pleadirii will 1 e h6iift,y i : or fitre largely unntel s,,o, ,ham". : ... t that appears to this court to be a e !mil civil rim action, proper jurisdiction lies in a Federal District Court rather than the Court of Com non Pleas and this cam did not err enteric ,an oi&r of dismissal, Common Pleas Court Opinion, S"tember 7 2012, at 2-3 Pew contends that dons brought-t under 42 U.S.C. X19* , ia a state court are subject to ce Wwal iwiodicti{ the common pleas court must entertain his complaint.' In S 12 A,2d 454, 4S6 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1973), this Court rep 11"c state courts to prat the Fs— This Court's rqNU r is.h #c a u,cf . were voted, ar law. Few v..Mechlina.929 A.2d 12 114, t 2Y 7 n 4 6 Similarly, in BalLhy v. Rank, 507 Pa. 384, 396, 490 A.2d 415, 420-421 (1985), our Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that, an action brought in the Pennsylvania state court system under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for money damages, was properly commenced in the Courts of Common Pleas: "We hold today the clear intent of the General Assembly is that actions against the Commonwealth or its officers acting in their official capacity for money damages based on tort liability are outside the original jurisdiction of Commonwealth Court and are properly commenced in the Courts of Common Pleas." Clearly, jurisdiction for actions brought against state officials acting under color of state law under 42 U.S.C. §1983 does not lie exclusively within the federal courts. Pew correctly asserts that the common pleas court erred when it dismissed his complaint on this basis.' Accordingly, this Court reverses the order of the common pleas court. This case is remanded to the common pleas court. ^4"' BERNARD L. McGItNLEY, J 2 In its brief the DOC essentially concedes that the common pleas court erred when it held that it lacked jurisdiction. DOC argues that the complaint should be dismissed pursuant to the "three strikes" provision of Section 1915(g) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). DOC cites a federal statute. Because Pew brought this action in state court, state law rather than federal law governs the procedures under which the action will be litigated. Jae v. Good 946 A.2d 802 (Pa. Crnwlth. 2008). Therefore,the law cited by DOC is inapplicable here. 7 IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tahansi, : Appellant V. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections Jemmy. A d Sectary of Corrections, Shirly M. Smeal Secretary of Corrections, John Wesel Secretary of Corrections, Dorina Vanier Chief Grievance Officer, H. Clifford O'Hara, Director, James C. Barnacle, Director, Franklin D. Tennis, B.(.Brian)Thompson, R. } ' Marsh,Mss eve, C. Grave, Kurt � �;: Granlund Unit Manager, Lieutenant " Barnes, Lieutemt Koo,saeger, Correctional Officer Gilliam, Correctional Officer Smith, : Correctional Officer Ryder, Correctional Officer Taylor, Major Morris of Unitrs, arid. No; 11,53 C.D. 20,12, Marirosa Lamas AND NOW, this 9th day of April, 2013, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County in the e- ..matter is my, ,, and this case is remanded to the>Court of Common Pleas of Jurisdiction relinquished. TWO is ,APR - 9 2013 1k rill Cci-a- ° 9t,,og (0.)4,agiok- C C ' I • c0\t - 'vsYse, 11--it-u%-J ay _ , ._ cs...„ - ,1 1\r-o- -era'&-I \76-0,..,7. - (-4-IFT)(7A‘) a---- egc (:)C. A' #' 'A.c4-tt al - 1:e . C) c -Co C- e--.\1-1C'e'. ,�,a - f,-s__,„ „.-c-f-- t � f an...- C , ems-h C iocOLG. 1 .isAe-,L br-A-4L2- ‘! ..i;--------35 N. . -it-AiNAIstsess-t- 1::).- 1412-;_i _&,e, 04.&-etteA64e3 c3PVI--'''' .6.0 c.P* \,..,c ( 1> p. 6 (:--6 (.,G sttea. occle.ausiak 1--lov.i -m.) da-ce ,414,c(e, 19-‘e L G GkA.--C-E--a4■t (--_, g• - e - --H--6 &ne2R-1N:.,*N.J6 \-It (t.--ft, at.)6 -009.3c€6 Gtrottc, 8e -C-e--01" 4-.60 ) 6 - - Cl. 3(G• Z6"SeSR tWICe) 03-4 rooNme6 '\ le,e-e t>GPJA.aes. - 1_ , )\A.R 6 vjspitea„ „sik-e/C0coki\- 1 4 �C ` =� it 1 CCU Et GLAcitp,I,ANZ\A'A'S - ,- Y-06`kt - '1-( 3 ' iNIGft(z. tfqiaig Mr3t\ j 4 c":° C) s.C2"%; oc ,_ ,--e,k -6225ii:e,f0f2, Li%-ek_ /1/44tkat,C, T„.„,,4 is- % 0 ,C0 co Wit- 06631 ,e .-- . AOe._ cos *, ' `A -60 b me,., 6ebfk, eA LA,p. -6-0*-40,00'\26 Ivo ,* de.-4,0t, veg._ eecYN /00•--1+1-‘, -CleNtS a"4"‘ .a t."1 ,CP4„-N2 Z e,.. e e, *. 3..44,D, -e,36\,..) .. � Leo - -i...3-6 c, ,Abi,�,:- co poi. ' c , toc--6C.Ced- --gri.) -1C, PP 4 Cpc2,4,C." -Iti ,, - ,,i-cv - /.. . gt--v.-tV c k,ce i-5-' v coat' . /1 0„ ' ° I�� 6 '10>"sc....0,.....c.. 7,.._..ctS,, .-k CI -0•°, (A.OLC /I 0 ,-■., .--N.-'bt v (Ad j 0.,6 4214 I - ----4P-e ' ,,„___nc.,. p ev--- r - ,. t ` Le-- ,,, ,L-z.,,e, t> . •-i1/4.-,---e)„,,e,kcyzeviv 4P-„ c..,.. - ,c-( 0- -o-r7c_,.. , -, 0 . _ \,-2F....,, . i (L, L,.... (L.2. 4r- 0'65 ocAAG, , , -2) 1,_)(iw AP40....e dN...,=‘,,k, .fec..,t„, _\;,___ , c n., pot 1,k,. cls, '-:((---ke'' ' '`' , i ci- Pv-v--- -3- tz----*" 3.6 4 se,.SL-41/4A" ' azo , te„..p----. .St' ' { ems-' , ? FY ,-8--"P. Pi\ 1 .., mfg- i d?� *.LAS-Al t-ic"-N,, ''''''ef2_, 141°'-.)-77--- c). c-----9,- L.., e„..3(-4;e1 er' „,_C C -t--er.A. . _. , LO boc...%/E-c_, „4,,c, „e- - ,,,,. i t _ bOc_de -e4./aAA-0.(_L\ CP4-**-e iN,4 '\ 6) .1.' e N.. ) -1- . 1., \t.ip.‹ , -0 Cb.c.,‘B-641; 6--€-73.r-- -C.)6\-c--1 CF*4-)r* , gyca CE;:"- ' 7,„.5k:. bZ°e-- r, • vc.2... S2, 0 b e' -. , r , , .:.,(r , ..ei iv "' \irk ( 6,00: ' #,‘41' "gl"'-' 0-1,c‘ !lc' 4n) A- li 4111, It \ , ' ap JP- 6 - III-- f RIP '0 ft -i' ,,e,, `'''',J cd4 44 ---• b.c,''',,,_ , _ �- • G ��. �.� � C Div `� _kt eL-AS:st�� - , JO) -7, # - ,-, • 411 9 111 Le''' , gLiSee-J, r -iN\-4 ( L 5cz bzece .:53.8_,,, C, ‘c-c- ( rz--, --s ac, L 4,- , e Nim p,it r d i ��y // o,r/at_ \ . ( { ( ,,� ;�� fig - , i �� �����-' �' � l ,� ` ��, '�' . �,. ��r sr( %('-) C4 4tcs G"‘„:1rG °- 1 OC-} 'IV , ihm. s` '- ; , - ( .- v.c,,, VP _A( \ ''' .0.4 t a t .0...)„....-atil.., 0 \i\rok. . . v - • c-ki , ,.,nr2 -----,-, .v., - • - . -to : '*). 1lVar -,-- 9' ...a6e, sue, I,;i \11. t` ef2j4`, C," -,ff Av At ' 2'St) -(„(-, 112,c3kis/ , u -,mY.Q.ic_i_. og - ez b De, ..-- -,....0P -- be,eA,e-- —z, . i c9 1\j/V kc,„L C 0-kir' )".9A Nft- ' ea) M21.C2cDAA, --ce- ,-i- 2-ejei4vits.,„„e-- 4 oF Ccia-0- 1. (. ,, S. Cel*a,(, c\i ---- . -- Scge., -.1;•....,\ i .- paAti\:'t arSts- 1 ---c-,-,,A?----"'" •4,0 ) 7.is'a once, ( J,,,,:'t‘\-r- GE9L- d cam-ce- -P , sk--- t- -J4 :- ' :.... masa-- c�( -' . f\A\e-c. 1^-6 cat_c , ' c,1/47€: ,,,,s_j_.\_,excxx& -as - e plz t cc - L AAA. t-C- ( --e: c ... ../.wti etc`8; - ( e t ' C c 4z. Gs eg 2c-C c b LiLS A- il" k 4 --e--NA A 44= Is eatex,,,se-ii* *-1- 49..a. -ek4-ke -GW E e-‘ ti-2.216.3e7,Asct .c)c,,kc, , L Es.6'%0 t tl,o\&zi, re Rk Mc - . - �- Ged c b , "ti...c o c W-Pcocess 7ir- t" c- - .,,, ( -66,_ P k r-1 -L-Ezz:F&Ze: If %‘,04...A.,-. 1-\ P(Z(;:. L. -CsA.)e.; AC._ gah&S ------ --bocKe-6-- C cam:- + Ck gw g„,€,_,a, - -ihe k1 pi 401 1 , 1 - bA.. . . �.. F TkE O C� �' ilk --IParZtE., Oc Gfeafrya, (fro ''' lie` Pke % �. ' -- - � ,.� . Cam$.., c , ( ,-He Tr° s-L ce cam.�� '�..-'_ �'� ��, ��' •r. , %t�,�-r' ,♦ 'art c @ "`6 .1� �` e r:M4 w tom., t R. a-.0-teio, v= c, Hz.t,,,,,oz . ,- i pet sc-4,1 -60 at 44' ,- \ i % ge.6 ' ' "4"‘gr ' k wed '3C, eCdeciiG ,Q. SC ,, ' br' " ` r, e_cKiivie eN3c1 a , Pe -L-k_C.CrTfd ie. preci.),' k- '" t'-' -'‘C, C,L.-r-,,. AA_C, ' __- J -41 ' i 5, 7Ty. b - cfr",..k i , pc--6, a_c oakfLt r _.v-ii-4 c,S. ve-o, -.6 o - --4-04 '-e_cSte ( .cs-)NA' \s*\\N:,-N-' V S,CC./.23e/ alk 41(-f Cie' ' ) .---te e , 1 'illw r, ( \ ^ 0 .e. Ge-t , , 69--- - f,) ,,,,07:2) Is, ,,,,,,or.) ; ,,,,,,.,1/41,,ki.j.. ,4v...a, ,:t4:0,),,, ,,_., _..t z pl,,-1\- P*--- 1k } i ' ( ' (,, _)* „;,te ,, * • \ c e\s-Pe % _NP, ira- 11'd P% � , _ 1., - - , C " ' tv -V 4,,,:(.( ,..1)Ce-" ' ,ep)e-,_:25,‘fe i(s.ee_,_ 0 ct ‘c-tti . , --tat . °-'tet ''it,.).1- -- r- e-be-N -Oh " c).°L. ' .., .a., ce, .(c)ce -. eie,„ _..6 C? ' , * (boi, . tt(_ .A t7, c'' cog- , , A -L''' ccircle,, --cz __. Pte'l/P) klacA-4.3 ) t KG l'cp -Eire' ice9e/' *----(62-- ,.._c )9 c.L. eice , is...-L- t,\Ve'PiC-1- G;(2' ' e . C.' o :Ait1/4-■ ZY-zi '?-` '' ke,"' ' ; ie:(43 -CeSE ,,,,,, ki.g'-''- c'c' Sc5 _ '' ) *--ter,;. am t C \t,,,..Jv x --, -: s , citt-8,4;J= .v'79,„?_,62 ._e_,.,F( o.r? , ce-t(GeGt &Q/4„,.- _ Th'!_t 0 tzesc- --‘41,..toz:e\ c--/ ' _,X11. . (2.. b - c � -SCL eftrt-,(7* 4 C-c-4GLI A ii,c. \2e:__ \c" ).-i --C_ ,,--(1' i..„ -ic,— 6..S14',��t 4r. qtr -� : -- Viz` v, cLe C. .&- :c1 Lt",t� �-, ti I\CIS , �, .- CCU -t.--,...C.e.... "- _ x� ,,� I ip, <17‘'fie ` t �ie a oi(- . —..,_ ....,__.2)....., (1)zi.12)1,c 16 -) _ ,V7,,S . bl' )' _._ k . ), -*-- ) N .'Z`' -', -1--216"\te jiairr tc1.7';& IIII■oe *Cei. j - . l\Ne.) .)::k4;. ( LetZ W C aat ,-‘ ' ttb \**. °.- r' '' - ,\, Y N\C2-tx)pcpC)Ce- I CZ \ :1‘. ,' *,Cge tio1/43.,-k gApt) zce_k- pf.c... _ •,, e,_..41/4 ,.,. r, ic.‘(1c.ic., 39. N‘ C ' r e, - 2, 1-triiic."4 Pt 'cc- to_ .... C ir \ ... -0‘,Jp --), 0,.3 . _{,,0 VI•e. Ifk 'I-"-.‘ (-'It'-4:- Pi&L ' '" il-C --. At42„-- Ci-E- - - c ( , ,p.sbod- , C9-X--4rt,.._jc.,LA..C.--A.k A Lip r k,.._ oci js c3s5:Dit.) t ' ,rte gec t �cd--tom ,, e■-, ' ' ' ''JC-_,-N-kt_ ` .4` r°C' Dr • E-Pe ( C,c-7 -a --(41'74c-14e161 bet\ekca •c-- acAzuNaS ) Afte -gcosde, _ Asse. , Ma- AAL -CCZ) h, ce--- eiGC- AACCC-K-C-- ) CC 724S '1' 4 Gipt- -. °B.kiF ., Ntaid ' ;A;lf, , QctccA Wiao.tiAt,,,, M '' ' - M,_,_ ,, Afileqs)) Act Ci*i‘k- C;AemAil , A , 0P, 61 t , I VT". SLI-AkLt ( r--zi, 1:1, Koeb(02-, - )4e) K CC' k, jr ---C( J -1(1-e- 4S---TaSkOW(C-IV)56 .. I-- - a'Afk,ag.1,--A.i)-)GP )---tC,Z-fer . if , k_ZoOrt Ea -te-2■1 ) V t . veiCE ‘srl 0 ) OC)Q) eac,kANici Lr , „, A\e„, waa a,,,_Ank -(006 &) c.. A..2),e -RICE \ ti ( C) . )cc, i . 2ca Ice 73TALci , ---e- k, V Er (ICA -ttc,it 1,- --- A ' i , 7--\ \\ tpc_ . pc..4.0, 4T7ZS), 1--- ...r....t, -61--,e,---6.' - ,, kt.. , . i -,- ;-• , , \ Arkr: vcc ( besej --go 'A4i bilL--- Cer ( - ' (4" C 4SO4 / .. -!-• . . , et C ,Dic. pA77: S. t9-4111 0c- eisAtii'vec'ta ;7# Lc-.N7%1 gn"is C'e _.-tV kCIS ) ' \ ' - 'at- ■ 1,(Pr, i - 1,, ..'' -16,0S-IS 4 --4-.C1-1 W - f --it 0 br-)4Pt)g-14E-aL -1 ,,Nv•&*\'' ,G);\.,. 4, --\A - - • 111) 41 41 , -tk a :tTe-2j->:*ca, Lfrc ... .------A -4-& 3 f■ A-yvkk(--ccf.)1/4)5w o "I' /, ■1 z: ____ , 0 • ...._ c:koj,..) . ,.... c, _ oc, -.!.. 6.7g ,' a : _ 1 ,iiii „14.4SA,:tt-P; r p■SCor. , f '' ;,,, f j7 '•..,a, 0--) \,c),„,3 ` ,.,p, ;lilt, Se-3`2; f 75.024iti e.,, Ofc:: Zit...) - ' LAX c \/■.14.>At \r,.c. f a' titt'-'0 9 - '. -;■•• C ...L_VN Z-- 94L- 0 &(-:■) k (MC, etifl. c1 Co-u•A'cL,,v, - _,tio , co . v t. '- -. Cevi-t-' - -‘ .\\*7 ■ -(-- -- c afi, (,04),,-,) tc.. 9 te6 (-- k..,-.> 4 ', a:a CC (/ ". eg -•/ .- --7----, (v e z._ b, ctovi\ 43!. k - CA, ‘c. t c.,,v3Ac.) , , . -r. ci) * ,.....tcy, _ c4...yo„ k --lk-Cg, 1/4-;-1-- p kZ(17 ' . '2• .... oe:Z1 ACk, -- \G'. c2,7. v-N _{,\ e_c_. .!<.: ,, j,_, s, ,/.42, ( , ( . , ..,\ cc,. /ts•. -, ...- -,... , 4104.40-4,;, ,Ge 4 C 11=>Let - Ort/trW r p COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY STACY PARKS MILLER Courthouse, Room 404 District Attorney Bellefonte, PA 16823 Telephone(814)355-6735 MARK S. SMITH Victim/Witness(814)548-1107 First Assistant District Attorney FAX(814)355-6756 www.centreda.orq To: Mr. Alfonso Percy Pew From: Office of District Attorney ARE: PRIVATE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT >Date: June 18, 2010 < Your private criminal complaint has been received by this office. Once a decision has been made regarding your complaint you will be notified via first class mail. a• Ael ) ,totttg fir n COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY STACY PARKS MILLER Courthouse, Room 404 District Attorney • Bellefonte, PA 16823 Telephone(814)355-6735 MARK S. SMITH Victim/Witness(814)548-1107 First Assistant District Attorney FAX(814) 355-6756 www.centreda.orq ,T June 22 , 2010 H. Clifford O'Hara, Director Office of Professional Responsibility Department of Corrections 2520 Lisburn Road P.O. Box 598 Camp Hill, PA 17001 RE: Private Complaint Dear Mr. O'Hara: • Please find enclosed herewith a copy of a private criminal complaint filed by Alfonso Pew, BT7263 against Corrections Officers Smith, Gillan, and Taalloor @ SCI Rockview: Please assign someone to investigate the matter and report back to me. No action will be taken by this office until I have reviewed the results of that investigation. C,- ref y, .w�fT s 11er District Attorney SPM/jlb Enclosure Cc : Alfonso Pew - BT7263 L-D<L ; I , .*-3 A Ph COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY STACY PARKS MILLER Courthouse, Room 404 District Attorney Bellefonte, PA 16823 Telephone(814)355-6735 MARK S. SMITH Victim/Witness(814)548-1107 First Assistant District Attorney FAX(814)355-6756 www.centreda.org October 4, 2011 State Correctional Institute at Rockview Alfonso P. Pew— BT-7263 Box A Bellefonte, PA 16823 Dear Mr. Pew: Please be advised that I have denied your Private Criminal Complaint as it does not constitute probable cause for any criminal conduct. At best the rest of your included documents refer exclusively to civil ri hts ---- >.matters. tVery Truly Yours, Stacyr�_-�._ ��:��_ _ r '_ Stacy Parka rvnnCi quire Centre County District Attorney Enclosure SPM/jlb _, E''(.V`1_,vt 6. -t-L _ — ) . COMMONWEALTH OF PE N,YI,VAN PRIVATE COUNTY OF: (( . I �tRt _ 1 - CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Map Dm No. /r y;;;A, f✓pJ Name:Hon. t .r �, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Address: ` 'T' } )-11u•r-lc: . app t D:FENDANT: K�t(l R NAME and ADDRESS �1 -g. A (/(E� ,-1 Telephone: ( � r ,�C�j `C�`6 oZQCl�� 4 Docket No.: ' t. �W P3 . is 4523 - i`r3 .0 Date Filed: i OTN: L ___I(Fill in defendants name and address) (Above to be completed by court personnel) Notice: Under Pa.R.Crim.P.506,your complaint may require approval by the attorney for the Commonwealth before it can be accepted by the magisterial district court.If the attorney for the Commonwealth disapproves your complaint,you may petldon the court of common pleas for review of the decision of the attorney for the Commonwealth. Fiil in as much information as you have. Del em's nao& einidty 0afsndsrn Sas 'Defendant'0.0.a. Defendant's Sods)Seamy Number 1osrerldsrn9 510(Mists Idemf Xenon Number) �Wdhns 0 Asian ❑ Nadi CI FFenWe I O t;Ysparrc D Neese American0 unknown .side - Defendant's A.KA.(aisoknoen as) Defendaa's wade Mormasen Dslendanes Doves Uor as Number Pleb Number State Repetratlan Stldor(MMlYY) Slab —_1 ---------- �I/� a !e c--+, , I, 1'4 f dJt i c Rc ,e v.J . 1�b . •+'-*inn.,,.-ease- at YPe do hereby state: (check the appropriate box) 1. 0 I accuse the above named defendant who lives at the address set forth above ❑ I accuse the defendant whose name is unknown to me but who is described as ❑ I accuse the defendant whose name and popular designation or nickname is unknown to me and whom I have therefore designated as John Doe ii >> // with violating the penal laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at t �` ats. C Gr...4 t -tzr ,cVvi C-v.f e-r■a c•►•• ■ ,,,.A2 tic--Pe1"^er.,,.4-c.T 212'es,teit.5c. ELL eeNt,t) in I.:- ( _ r- ft:: County on or about Q-c, tc Z...Jct. 'A C O dartici•ants re: (if there were participants, lace their names here,rape-tang the name .f a••°e defend. :) s.A- R.' .. trt_Jt 4._ RI,Q - C tom_ •• U r..rtt ac, Z, 4 . Gitz,4.1.4 t u,t..t c . 2. The acts committed by the accused were: (Set forth a summary of the facts sufficient to advise the delendant.of the nature of the offense cheeped.A citation to the statute allegedly violated, without more,is not stAttciertl.In a summary u must cite tll a space sec ion su statute or ordinance Allegedly violated.) G+�AnnnA42 PeA CS I-4, .3...A,LA 3. ..,A aCAO Kettk,C ,1,.t(�e.t,4 oR e—c L. gl..Rr366Av Se.eC.ett e�( ) peg.Sc,t�(paz , (e z( e, 1. d Q1*' (s N lb I • LPC J P ' 12 z�x:� Qe. tc ,tS .4z, k e w L H, �i' c l-tt l c.i -ms. N►z fuel C,'P G Ste, chza2c .,8., , ,wo.D.) L l �3rR.�w►r..t� '-L."., e8 1<-, -t- 1- `1 - t s �A..t[a,,r (c .sctz_ecetc••.A> p t`� 1 J ., �., a !ze' t fcrz cC , zcy c�`bs -tcf. `i) oi•3 k(. e tJ1-,t-s Ri�_� e. s roc` ecc es5 f� e C iz 6� S Q t eoAc_e zy0 l'ao-IsL,tc fs. C 7 ta'6zc.�S cc Ste Cl 0 IC& o2,.C.c. A.`3S�C3( x • z • � c r �` 2 ZCt.�,(.,. .1\Z ® sL ACR1C�.t e /J 40 1 �. SC:1 Z�l( i�`�^A S 'e �iv �yLs ! Q 'e v��to tr_ f T P t-(> R tz ao f 4`. C�_ SPGSSC'S�ukr_r3 t e..ykiZt�4k3.tekep , WMN?QKr .3f'ZC .+ :Cl�(, U�sC MZ1.lZ�c?�1( W SCI L�. C-c+..).; 2,5. 0 Mi c t-z<L ezp e.L Vic -z,, l,�>,,� - J� ..cam e g e-t-6S LI., c -th(-, `�.�``',,L,. ., . ,. rA s-� Z a ,.c --+.iU,.s (-2,e4,_:. Ehe, �k' l�C R, i2. 3 z � �s �., .� �� kb Lei z(; � 2e: UPC-0� p z�. AOPC 411A-05 P - ��( c1ct 1 2 Z(=� 9 z 1�a‘.....c.,1/4.A. c e RL ` k K�..Le.. 40 t C e Lam'. & �z►NHS r., h . QC�c t a C--�` c��r 1•,e i Lu R \,., s I I eRg z C .►., � 1 7.........) e t�- c, c,iz p*-t_a p c.C c j e. (Continuatton of No.2) PRIVATE Defendant's Name: Kvaz-k C�aAt..►� ki....SCI—Z I. : CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Lt. Q&tZ.t S )41r711-4%k Docket Number: -1111S cc_AN pi Z',�-G !s 6z9e.c1 C.-3 c1c :.,NA.'.�{ - r- 42 e-CC..,2a. Q_Nryvvc—u e (- - ,.;s-(.ui bet? --r.�►��,,r f-c-C. Q,2 occ__ ',„ As,\ s-Ce -4°C -LA- -1 0 .�ZC. .rnr.-, Ge e.. (?kXcc ueC PCz' ( t 3'S 1 t *zaqC,,Sa„ Iru.Q'£. GrzA,4 1t,,,,,38 V,as 0,) 2O 3 c-,,.?e s e,•n,plc.hne.}f• be St -€-(- Clt ,<tcg&sei z t.ss Pk ltt) 6t l(j Ste . CZ 2.ec{& .C 'I c.) e,`6- a2-e< -t , Sfztc sz mac...{ C ri,sc..00 ..ftc e• c c,ckc...7E-.f.1 . \i1/41 ONE. a 6 -k, ?. e:3 , • C) cAc,w ti -€0 a u z M �C . beceA Crc Sc r.n c(aa nn i.SCti.,...) ,;,C=t Z. 2 c,-.)r� Cs M Z 17 5 .. K- `C C 2 ate?ic,,, `k "AeAksA -& s 1 CcLe?e C ( :.. n. '(-t �,c LCs c-`) 2.`t Pc c. Kv rC-vJ ,,,Qc) Wc'S L,`t °` � Nit z.,. L - ti c� A a v1L M C C< kC a s > RksC ' ,tc t A - L . g2 C.�3 c>“\A(.• 'It(n P.NA2, �c,� Z . ► ,tt e k&2 � , l, 211.Q ec(C -e,..::430-t. -e--/L)04,1C--(2_ `,�NAZ .\ wz re,.-1:01.. .� 4 o� (cc,D -&.;t. a (SC T2 e►�c1.�c.e, 2 -, ute..,t{ 1\r"l��?sc cC Cnn £hc MA t\( tivt i , A Lfa.:v cS a z T(*C), 2. cj Cj -C c Z ( CippF e Sc cQ all of which were against the peace and di ity If the Commonwealth of Penns Ivania an• contr. to th- Act of Assembly, or in violation of ) and 0 !_.." r ••tz• ' • of the I aN �v?�(J C8 g at... Aawx� a' �, .,o„ (PA Statute) 3. I ask that process be issued and that the defendant be required to answer the charges I have made. 4. I verify that the facts set forth in this complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge or information end belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties of Se Lion 4904 of the Crimes Code(18 Pa.;.S. §4904)relating to unswom falsification to authorities. . - . ..A__I ., 20'11 iii,A. 1%...L"'-`--N.vr,:n"—.e11)---- P a ,,, f iit-CarlitV-- Office of the Atto►• -y r the Comm° wealth Approv.'1 j,; . •• oved because: ,,/ •, r 2 N. r"(-a ' tAit/P AA 1109%ad I . (Name• � •may f• (•ommon�veaM)•PI e F'riril a Type) ' ( • r of «MY for CammolrNMl7t) Oat,%.26 � /- _�'�� J AND NOW, •n this date \�- , I certify that the complaint has been lr/vi r`yw�+f i(At�_jT'' properly completed and verified. ci, SEA �/, (Magnteri.D'stnq) pump Authority► • L AOPC4118-0s 2-2 To Cte K b irA, Er,.. (C t I. c. e-e 6N421es P. toaeds 6><11.-14-6 kw se I o . • a C.3 A- i Al' •:,. (I DC 804 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR OFFICIAL US ONLY Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS P.O. BOX 598 CAMP OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE J L, PA 17001-0598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER TO`'wettftreeictteienge eeeRDINOrTOR- . F• I • DA E FRO ( E NAME UMBER SIG �'p of INM•�1 g lZQ mi - g- rta rS WORK ASS GNMENT: HOU G . N EN I: G rJ� S INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Refer-to-the-D ->8O4 or pecedufe&en imt rievance system, 2. ..State,your giauan to able annex... 3. List-in-Bloek-B-anyaction .yam a :take lve,this-matter:° e-the ider t r°of staff members.ycu.have.contacted A. -Provide a brief,-lear.statemento# rr grievance: Additional-papern ay eldYfaximum two pages (one DC- and a�-one ?nees d 8,;f ¶1="" a' ':'"S 'atrei a -Kat`yu -seeking. t `d• - . o (2 ,el ; �1 .ei-1 i,e,)e, .e.)6 s€c°CC 6eu.,�c cS er ©2 bk wZ� -to zPPeet --0-,∎S 6 eIe Njo, .&42115/5,.. Plc 664"ee M"erg fKC'i 2��)�a CeCC lL,h,�, f a '�" • 6 ai Le Q� ��� Ie a� �e -0 Lt c�CCt� z =ve Ana e, ,.,U cc IVY �A `�� 171-..S. ' ,--Gelf-rL. eKS ) AS. ';a er.�• l-�.�.� -�o S e6 pnc.0e 0 >2ecu2ds . � �ePees •1 r S 2cCAc Le, �� P et o 14v l't �,.x. ss sp Gee- C,` . 2 zc kw t / P�� eec�.c dS se S 5C L _e ,i k• e,cCes- O eee_Tze, = z„,`o.., �^� z.,�>� a 1�:)e l ems"G � �. 2.-� ec (�d s,512 B:--•List•actic to pen,and t ff you 4ave COflt ;b -sb ng this_=grievance. e.41-, 1,, t,'. A_ --, ticitet As el ) --(s 1 s 82 r ems, Anz l-, An e gcc,.3 e•, a C a,off, 2.Mttt Cce , Ian c N�ee°rs /A, Q ;�c� 2.ee, zcC i..)scd e,�tz i e, e, rte► e e .1ce;��,c.,.) Kr■ic&,J =5 Ye -Eo -6-�e- a.� -f{.-, e.. to a>.)0. c�,.�-C `c et M (a, Ere `C 2 tss p Z LC� FEQ -k D. j r.�c.l i e%j— -fk e 3 wO e-� LA,_se_ P� e s( P c2.� CS - s o .,,, ,e, , ..,,e,.. ,e L 6z(, Azrf(C(a o e,lc � . gee Cxh,b `Cs -4o 0 2lytzC Gal P....v.'.ICe; GIGO Aev 2(48. E). -)1.6-€ A g ce-J -this APPue 6 pc e s tiP Le Your ri a e as en i d and pZc�e ganee with t✓-P�De �&Q m?�v�C e ! L I Your ss is C tQ o . See e fi e. Cx�1,k-C') Ma. b �Q �C e- i- 1 t zs h t s -41-,e. g. «ess 'a.-47. cr•..c,T6 H rte.`€ K.jCA •wc�j e.)--t Pj,,e 1.-Qis -to /pro c ess e, e A C Cc`/Sijr tore-0-,e_F cctl ce i L-i . /41 , 41 c CQ,�7,, , e...4 ,e CJe eJ e-,-.)(S o-U,C- coeCZsse -C-L ��-�C L.tc J+- sCr i `fie. 1 I n-».�vflla e-.,uebr —�-- A M opezfr" Cc,/ 2 cfe( e- it,e_ 4pP z t {o 2ecre A WHITE--=Facility OrCOpy .ANA t-Fite"G"opyPINK-.. MticnReturnC.o:• CeLDENRQD- at opy 'C ,-1MG Revised e Z M c( ICr I�) . �S -C tin Nc a Lr . APfeer CAP wit s-�t(( T\le<s c--t- 4-< 1 z e -Fo Co z2 N<C1 1 e zt e,.� 1c�es w��► s 1 5�1P c�CZs�s�iP " --S4,ec,P. A ` . c(Z1 , cc3 E 1t-„s .sc„t�t • 1,-,e„) t e.fs-i- . -T-c• C,k eQ KA/TA g . ei.A..a. - .4-2. -0-1E.,- #' ( ., *- - ,Acci,..4. -a_ 126c42a boc -r ( i fy.itiit E-2z. &4-116.t.--6- A -Ds. - liu. ‘ scoN,z_c)ID ,, a, .. _„ DC-804 CO ON ALTH 0 PENNSYLVANIA FOR OFFICIAL SE ONLY Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS P.O. BOX 598 CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0598 GRIEVANCE NUMBERS 9 OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE \ok,ok Apc- _,AC -t, T•: FACIL 4:47: -L:4_ ::: :.=.: -.4 . e 7 MAisjp&e(2_ FACILITY: D• : AA \A 4 " • ' -18\*.AA. At t k l k . ' , FROIV: ( Na IMATE NAW&NurypER) ,.., S k • "E of INM II : A k r,NF-,c) iria(D. WORK AS IGNMENT: HOUSIN lir SSIGNMENT: INSTRUCTIONS: 1 ten. 3..-- klifithicoalsiasydistialarpvinunayAioge4Wwwieleaseiblie-ttrtisAiwatter.,416,1641Wea-'weltifiet4te-ideftifity-ef-saff- A. Pnalcida.a.• -_- ,S..- 2. 2 1- .3, ' ' ...,:,... . 2' 22 • -. ' ' - r:- Frt"'":*:';':- ■V e DC...84 41aramackerfereffle4:42418-12:.'402*§firagSO4M61:614F9N014.940yehi.aifing. a ct-e6 0- yc,ei. mcGee, -- ---,A,S z_c.)1A 'the-. 2`js 7-- ‘‘'ci -6 Af(Deq 4-0 i--t-A■.\ . --C-ert CPc_. -c4Z, 4 s-e-_,--1'S = d■c\ a3 L l......52.S pm,,... jccV8, . ,---,. N ci 4 0,AS kS ,..) -42 e cl,Dtc.r,i. I eve? c.= Cre,- ._8, `rt)-42- -2 a cc 1 CPC+ VG■0 l, Arsooae, 1 e+-1- - -- ' 4.S&(‘Q l•-)2se e_A.0 --t-sst.A6 C:) A eA"N-1 -6-.Ns ■,ss■-te DGdolo iv \e/.. IV> 6 &CecoNe, Mg, . ) gAp.:u,szGE, c)cf(Le, meCly,,Aci,Ge44) CM ae tkA■ k kc,c? Pr's21'N. ' e10-) 2., c Q\ikaAp C._ AAc.)oie. e L -a,Re_, N.Neisel.ec einr-A.,k+ -4-\-- c 19--SLAk- 04- t-- I Lea el Al , ..t(a €"-)--)ek-43 e-- c-)A e----) hA-e,11 .--------c i. a cesl, s( k ( .."-Tc:" -e-ke,- e'.---7"—. ,,..)6-6, a G,...LeVADPS n Cc..ac, . Pc 1A bc, AN.A c6 c7 c . V-11 t,JdGe6,-_a --C, i-The- ., c 2_± .A.,c_c_e 13.1.,Er_a-rizQ.. ..c.) .,,,,Acis c......... e.,..3L)e.lcipes -t-o p -,1/4.-t- I% a(a ck_O-AAA-0-,AS ri,-4 ' 40 ,v , +0 --T-ir, a7----c.e, ---k-i--) u..)'L'.(„C 1.)c.)-t- tm) e,..)--E- cA.-v-t--- st.-- L 1--‘e,--Je_ ,-,,c__)--1-- pLA.e_ ci-- a-se a Ccy-v\i‘Akzfd_r_GQ.etc_ipe__. Es4G4.3 =4- l _e'5 1._i a s\Zp 2.‘-)C.‘ in e.,..)e,it 1 Q. , 0 0 _IT-_,.. .1 ■'___S er,...)C. pc)s--f-e„5 s 44: t k c_2,...)-k- se.„.K.S, t 1.-,e 42....),--) e-1/4cp,e- cA-A-4- e.A_R__. . o■.SW-- p e ki 't- ) e ( +0 1/■.1 k.C..\'"1 i 2..) Vee e., AAc,,,)cpc, \A r.1 /,.k e, L L 9 i je8e.A, relzA l, -ik.) Cs.J,..b (2._t' k.A.,-,.)I e.0-,Ls J--- Pe, ... V , . .„-- ._.......,. ... __ .. - - -. - - . ,... .- yismaincidtraereptiAtMaYa° ---- - ' :i. - .""*'. ' ' . ' : .' ; ::.: ' " PricQ4act'417.., A-&i.,. - Ac2),.0 III.t _cca.-Loue ___.. -4-r,,.4fr_,„, ,N", L es e.t rde-cos 9) - �. �� - - • NI ..1j,z, . �- _ �. - �- 0 C, '— , 'q '' es4 A ld M,i+ Irilt, fro it, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA F L SE q- DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS P.O. BOX 598 D• '-o k �• GRIEVANCE NUMBER .. _ C' CAMP HIL PA 17001-0598 0 ICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE � L CLENAIAI 2-1/..1.14.- ,k 0 k..I► firtmet, °q �4it t FRO : (I TE NA sil13 NUMBS SI! 'E OF IN E: � --��a ; WORK S IGNMMENT H t N I Ni EN: INSTRUCTIONS: = ,0lv1/4 (7c#.3 ,- cte3-:Vii" i - 'iii ` `r -.-.. - o � 'e� tom_ p 4�' &Acit0 ,44-2.. � 64 ct, ct, why 's n4 ee \ p� � • -- ° \ . - ' _ !! tr.D . � o j . �� i 0am hie5*- (2e...cAe4e_.„ a „s4..,rfs-t, zief,"es. ?„,....6,,,se ."-±' 2s-Z �1� �Iry 1.23-1 ZCC .. be e, � .. 2,* ( +" ° e.. , wed . - ,P t,-0k {'t . i t c s�.C-- :3 - AP .1 2 Pc- .: r -fhb L, (-kactIre.. ,-v ;fit @ ;ii C / - inzzE'_, i '? Sts, 6 .► ,, ,....?„..rgas A.,,e.P2A, 2-1/4_11NN-tel...- .'e3,3 . .r.JEIK, 14. '0 • Art VV.Ci_, abtte I.C..1 eo �- C- _. I ► .► w-1r• - !!'-. Gy'i •e A._, ! . k ' •, _• '•. ' i6 17' s' r Y 4 r / ., i �.. —`. .. — � � tliz, •a' t 2 b.:; la i PO $0.44411,....- - - - '‘, -2„ —- - ■-cL,-1( co,.. ._,,. L._‘,, C?AAS-itt".._41 ---C--+u■Z(, ,,, - „,,,. _la'. c).-3?,(1.11',. t - -- 6'- y`_ �rri - , �:. -. - - - 41141111), al h li, .. & � 1S N. A,Mi1. "'` -, each - X- „t .Kee f • , l __ar•*+i :+ cj 4 - • (LDvp���u. , ”. C. -- r + i i . 4. --......._Cr C.- ' ' t...;(.., 4fgetitypao _ - - s c ve - - -eke sz.,,n� - ,~ e cg t etcc:s4;, . cl e_ . Sect _ e., C:M, t:7,4 tr +t, FINAL APPEAL DECISION Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances & Appeals Pennsylvania Department of Corrections P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598 This serves to acknowledge receipt of your appeal to final review for the grievance identified below. In accordance with the provisions of DC-ADM 804, "Inmate Grievance System,"this Office has reviewed all documents provided as part of the grievance record. Upon consideration of the entire record, it is the decision of this office to dismiss your appeal to final review due to a failure to comply with the provisions of the DC-ADM 804, as specified below. Inmate Name g Alfonso Pew inmate:Number .,,. BT7263 ---� SCI;Filed at: Rockview [ Current SC: ,,,; Smithfield Grievance#: 348942 ----� Decision sit:';' Dismiss '' 1) Your grievance was properly rejected at the facility level for the reason(s) outlined below. ---� X 2) Your grievance is being dismissed at the final appeal level for the reason(s) outlined below. Rationale 1.Grievances related to the following shall be handled g 'issues dled according to procedures specified in the policies listed and shall not be reviewed by the Facility Grievance Coordinator. a) DC-ADM 801, "Inmate Discipline"/Misconduct Procedures b) DC-ADM 802, "Administrative Custody Procedures 2. Grievance does not indicate that you were personally affected by a Department or facility action or policy. 3. Group grievances are prohibited. 4.The grievance was not signed and/or dated with correct commitment name, number, contained UCC references, or was not presented in proper format. 5. Grievance or appeal was not legible, understandable, or was not presented in a courteous manner. 6. Grievance or appeal exceeded two pages(was too lengthy). 7. Grievances based upon different events must be presented separately. X 8. Grievance or appeal was not submitted timely. 9. You are currently on grievance restriction and have already filed your allowable grievance. The last accepted grievance was# submitted on 10. Grievance or appeal must be reviewed through the facility at which the concern initiated. 11. The issue presented in your grievance has been reviewed and addressed in a previous grievance. Prior grievance#. 12. The publication appeal did not include a copy of the IPRC denial form. 13. You have not provided this Office with required documentation for proper review. 14. You failed to appeal to the Facility Manager, although you were reminded to do so. 15. An appeal to final review is not permitted when you fail to comply with submission procedures. 16. Grievance is related to current litigation and will not be addressed in this forum. Response: _ The initial review response in Grievance No. 348942 was completed on January 18, 2011. DC ADM 804 provides that an inmate may appeal an initial review response to the Facility Manager within fifteen working days from the date of the initial review response. Your appeal to the Facility Manager was received approximately six months after completion of the initial review response. Your appeal to the Facility Manager was considered untimely. As such, your appeal to final review is dismissed as untimely. Signature: Dorina Varner p^a_. zi `C/Lt Title: Chief Grievance Officer �-� Date: 10/14/2011 4---- DLV/LLS cc: DC-15/Superintendent Fisher Grievance Office Superintendent Lamas aI %, to G.)-- c Bc1-1Z,tc - Ac.-* c.?4se, jc), t 1 G-' C . 2J312 9-eivAe"Zde . I A A •404" DC-804 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR OF_CIAL ONLY Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS A •If A P.O. BOX 598 ' Ai , CAMP my_ PA 17001-0598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER .LI OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE fer.. NCAepeA,ts, TO: aC.)RZ t■I/6.s. a FE tNZA_TOR Fq1T.. : DATE y A Q ) smi % L CC FRO : (I 'TE NAM. ; NUMBER) SI . T. R: of INM it IP 1 ...-...411 t.......... a ......_ ... t 0 • V _ .. WORK ASSIGNMENT: HOUSINLA , MEF: t`ftsbNile... V t INSTRUCTIONS: 3. I igt;- :.6,‘.. : . . .', *-. 5. •:.■ .-':-..-''' - . '5 iStinate-imokotio44443.4dokity-ofistaft mestab—ei4e- kiiiited. 800.4neke"..1% 0"...$ geSCJ2c1 - a M-1-,e-,0e, 2,4A G-EZ&C AN& lc, ° • -,i, ACC 0 APPGAC 4+- dekcack.ekri a....)6 * .34,sct-lo Act z_--•/(,s it* 342.942_,44_ -line, ,s f2Ze-re--,)c-e, Peozzds ■,...r(?--E, t"'''''-k4N-ele> ?---'8' --x-`r , ,i•A?--a,c, %-‘ 0z-cA-AS ecyk-) -kio L A-1,0(Vtk. ,..si,.., --3:as\aci-) --' • cr-A-A0--9-- ( e- •i 1\14 , --(4",•Xce, i x& l■AG iC-6 TT ecierp-L Pzac-kaC, Peoez_&. t-61/(eCc'Peal '2"t2P ze-T- SL,c;AJ_S # ;;; a-clati-C-S -- CALA\\ s-a_lcz szt, c see C. --zetv-\3,...) gzeir_c:,,.) ,) a.-El )■/'1/4t.. c. ---% k.)c,--W_, A...---6-16,3 tcsxsec, ..... voa_ eec02.8, ,,,„ 9_1/4A G7.4,1n1/4.' 6•°j- A- Li...4,a-L cj2,3 c-...)a C, Ge e,) - EL-List, - '-. - : .. ,-: --.. • . . '-..- .,..., . . ,,-- '.-'e e AlisigdevanGe. ' r tep AA 044. Ma Nia(Qe_ S --tcav -sia &.0,c, -0„..r.S Ma e c7t .e.2e.3ele.x. _ , esz,L ev..act e.,-)oek2Q.S -e-1--(r--42., 1CD -F-9-ee niv,,,M--) Ze.e... LA,. qI, eede8, 4-0 "A72:a te3-6 L-)L.-6--, --4-,-12.,Al 0,.00 -1 1A:se,* tc,A, Pc. r -e--, , ---T--- cki,r-rt. 1,-Nie t 0 e.,...)Lde(QpIeS, 413 ,v‘z,e, -)fit-Q.- let Cr.icitt'Se,A rx)V. -11--i-e. P os- A„e.. -1, C.---6Izek.A+ e,,N)e-AC-P-e . . eQ__. -fle-r,...ce..., ANs--,,,Qe/z_. —1C-,Cs vs i#..) b c t s e.ea,cz , )c-ft iti- . 3e<olicc _T-.._ Eo_ #Tr -* App.- ,.(2_pQaC ,The-y, ArkzA( WI-cc be- se--J-(--- cm..±. at it-422 i k3 trz-ef, r..41/4- JetC_PCS. cl-,0%-rel-->(w.2.e, L,A, evi4 -ii,12 belt ...- ,- -. -- -,i - - - -- - -'---;--- -- '' . ' -'.4.' 8434. ar-J-e8 --k) So ct--k,e , Lx.,) - -,c)-e_e, . -c-J .)e..) - • - CpP , c -eizs--E Cikt .SeR. .. p2(c3 e ....$.-)ep-e_s _ 'e., Atte-yrti-t) - 4cpea,t 1-s-erz,-e_ FL,,,se I t2e)b-v eA,3 ( d 1-6 G.A.JCIC-410■C 6 e.Juae, !!)-e.., ---- .. i".- ' '‘ Ai 6, i C, bi, C z11 (-r4'3 .1■Az,A Lettere; ,rv-1-z.„k . ■- NAVZ-. — tOC,t(,erS ■ __,.1 Poc_W\a„) rv\?A:L(23c),NA. . Ct..) R ( Pe,A7ek,o aeilit.) WHIT -F. ''6, .1,, . . . ' • ' Action-Flptarn eel. re• .■,.- , - I, i ..-trtrrate Copy .. - 1--,e,_*, /scocle ge..coe4s -0-,,G celot-me,,,ye.„pc.,e, -=AAA lsillti'42005– -•:-/.__L-• _. ,f3! 10 4Z.41 -,St*C'•3Z,t Elf>e-• • oc), eks-kg e., "----- " --- .0,d E`-� Rte" '" a « 1�-� A >41" II" 14N • 'so Cie t40‘ ��k-S 4- A e e.A. DC-804 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR OF IAL U Y Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS P.O. BOX 598 A CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER )''` OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE S "4'y IL ^ TO: � �� F L ILITY: DATE ocz ,-y) c FROM (I TE NAME UMBER) SI ' 41-11- of INM•� WORK ASSIGNMENT: HOUSING •W IG ME T: INSTRUCTIONS: 1.•• .Refer,to.tkae••BG-ArBN systerrt. 2. Sate VOUisreanr,: 3. List r berC ynr r h�l°nr Q r ' ' _.. matter Be-s ue-t y-e€.__ f Dao i 4a rt . A. Pr r_ • • - • . , .. -- a--,-.*, -•._e -- • • •e5. - 3: 9 ' Tef1e'.r` to eek . `"�i ,2e. \-4f-1/4-A-e--)eft- =-4:c-ge, F.,-zeM C: f , cam, , 1..)e..) erz ree CA --8 ‘e h X).C., Pt.)1*Cf4 ""L'."'.." '"'"`" -4-- \i-AS t S e_ibe,LA-- R,e, --=1.6.3*,,, s-6.:4;,‘Lc,`" zee., -r-kiozs7, e_J erClAC-e&lie 1-C)•00 C s Z -et C 0 ! D .0 c)k z.S �, Cr�n.n e,a p� J w z --A-, 0e, k. GSr i w k t,6,, � u s E e C-A-4.P w e-'1--, a 1-1.3( e. B. List-aet i Ifs€€- o • artce. 4C? 1--�,�„6 -# ,�.1t :�,-, -e.S k..,; .,OrN i S t NW C2 t be-e, •fir r: .�h✓'�, t r.i � t� �J� ?fi��1 t•3 {-1--As c)bS uLi-d r -I-9 c ce,Fxtzsl 4 . - =�. u fie.., 'Pa . D '2 (k)ll d cc, c r 1 max. -� �. e� �t pct �-e, �`� Co c f tees as l l e 4 Lie Lc92 E'eAc.o eS c Pec,� "as GC o ° s ' es �s . asks e. a c e g z‘ G� - E - e -& 4 . L e 21 &we c�e.,S t d i 5 WHITE •• � -tt, - -.--.*, _ ,. - 1--, - _ ¢.,s ens t e Co t �. e, =C -L' R1V6,3 V b e40 50 ()J O e t C GCS ‘nr.oa, -ctal 42..csf-- ‘2: - --Q--ls-'- -2.Lek„ckc42- 1( be,' 1 . ,,e,‘-. ,e, "4.2... - t'7&"/ , - ' ' . - 4T .-X gvfik--' ti 4,etrss'bx. .i =ipreiN-C .g;;,',,. Rtf.A .,)r--,e.:)\ G.3 ,, ' t - i ___,,___A ger ib, ., ck . ,DC-804 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA '� . 0 ,_L Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS - A. • 4jA Rev 9/201.0 P.O. BOX 598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER CcMt _, -ip•--", Cb CAMP HILL PA 17001-0598 � p ATE GRIEVANCE •.- •- IENe4 TO - - - A ITY• , TE: NU FRO IN■ ATE NAB & NUMBER OF IN � ::--- Dm WOR A SIGNMENT: H•USING V IGNVE \� • INSTRUCTIONS: • . - - S_a ` Acve,o.C a-{' T-tkts. .(., sg 4, Ntcyze., 4zSr.G.A., a use-- D - CG-) . . " tints 1A<L Pe-Yv ,A `C zs 1L - - �d� C a_� "•�`.ieb e?, �Q- , CCk . hte....3 _ N caw c -k � CCw-I-0 e>41,--D 9 t, A W es , Z:-.re- g iS ' z .. : ci `- tee& .e�pc a. -f`A. 9, Z- tea.. ., -1-"w6-94.4`)6 -.6 CS )- - dt -ewes a P' == ) g kk 4 , ok 7t .rte. Peek -. Ertl S .ry - 1 ® c- . bC- C e :eb 'It, dal' -�: tC Abtd& `Vv '�C ,L I* ,�J/I"j;�Fae _V , "' - 14 i. ,. ,C )�12 51-, 4 Q " fr t'C � S �-�+ ]� 4r o bzs\'' - 2,4.11`C.] ...i�, lR a U..J!,-�^? -•ej"-�i p "c t`Z'i r 0. _ i •i,e "" . _ PCS -4(;::'--- - _ . • r e- ---;-- �-'� CjJ..e,r •a- el l.+t:t.°�'i'1 �Ci`^► ; e, 4 A :i_C 2c 1 Z e., � e-s k..04e- CmP t` ;C1 ,S 'a46i4414a44"4"ruirmisi4i4WA44r e>4_ iste.J" ' Le5,_&, -- ---t-t-:ks a extCR/56,1/4) `{,,,, ,t d 1 ( _ 4-e/t4)QS ,` -am(C- y ISAGA ( C e � e 0 d � CzArc,14ill, fie_ (s acwitittvr � -(1hf t e, -zcit_ ege, ice- di akAA r— . ,ua MO 1i(fjr, tfr e-k .:c - ice/ cif' ert°1-1'"N-i e • 1-0 . h CIC - NA\47c1) E . ,�. boct -(- y,°-÷201. - �� ��� A e z. FINAL APP EAL DECISION Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances &Appeals Pennsylvania Department of Corrections P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598 This serves to acknowledge receipt of your appeal to final review for the grievance identified below. In accordance with the provisions of DC-ADM 804, "Inmate Grievance System,"this Office has reviewed all documents provided as part of the grievance record. Upon consideration of the entire record, it is the decision of this office to dismiss your appeal to final review due to a failure to comply with the provisions of the DC-ADM 804, as specified below. Inmate islaniqr Alfonso Pew Inmate Number: BT7263 SCI Filg ,at: `. Rockview Current SCI; Smithfield �—i- _.._�. ,Grievance"#f ' � � 348947 Decision; I Dismiss 1) Your grievance was properly rejected at the facility level for the reason(s)outlined below. X 2) Your grievance is being dismissed at the final appeal level for the reason(s)outlined below. Rationale 1.Grievances related to the following issues shall be handled according to procedures specified in the policies listed and shall not be reviewed by the Facility Grievance Coordinator. a)DC-ADM 801, "Inmate Discipline"/Misconduct Procedures b) DC-ADM 802, "Administrative Custody Procedures 2. Grievance does not indicate that you were personally affected by a Department or facility action or policy. 3. Group grievances are prohibited. 4.The grievance was not signed and/or dated with correct commitment name, number, contained UCC references, or was not presented in proper format. 5. Grievance or appeal was not legible, understandable, or was not presented in a courteous manner. 6. Grievance or appeal exceeded two pages(was too lengthy). 7. Grievances based upon different events must be presented separately. X 8. Grievance or appeal was not submitted timely. 9. You are currently on grievance restriction and have already filed your allowable grievance. The last accepted grievance was# submitted on 10. Grievance or appeal must be reviewed through the facility at which the concern initiated. 11. The issue presented in your grievance has been reviewed and addressed in a previous grievance. Prior grievance#. 12.The publication appeal did not include a copy of the IPRC denial form. 13. You have not provided this Office with required documentation for proper review. 14. You failed to appeal to the Facility Manager, although you were reminded to do so. 15. An appeal to final review is not permitted when you fail to comply with submission procedures. 16. Grievance is related to current litigation and will not be addressed in this forum. Response The initial review response in Grievance No. 348947 was completed on January 18, 2011. DC ADM 804 provides that an inmate may appeal an initial review response to the Facility Manager within fifteen working days from the date of the initial review response. Your appeal to the Facility Manager was received approximately six months after completion of the initial review response. Your appeal to the Facility Manager was considered untimely. As such, your appeal to final review is dismissed as untimely. Signature: Dorina Varner //2/024/- Title: Chief Grievance Officer Date: 10/14/2011 �----- DLV/LLS cc: DC-15/Superintendent Fisher Grievance Office Superintendent Lamas -4.1111111111111111111110111111110 . C � G The,C beice S :. . To. Ci DC-804 Ae I �L l- NW OF PENNSYLVANIA FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY _Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS�cc peiw,,,._.6,C t C.1N• t P.O. BOX 598 ,,,. '�7 CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE f ; TLFACILITY G�iIFVANF` ORDINATC‘R FAC�I �L= DGEi �/ik k FR �!°(I TE NAME&N 1r BER) 'AI's SIG�( ?, iiii of INMAT .,--g1/41 fis-riari=, sitm.,:. .. ) V-too.) WORK ASSIGNMENT: HOUSING 1GNMEN till CJ,*.� .� , , . I t INSTRUCTIONS: "+) % L, 1 g ' 1. Refer to the DC-A P V 1- or procedures s on a inmate grievance system. 4.,i- 2. State your grievance in Block A in a brief and understandable manner. (�, =. Ile., 3. List in Block B any actions you may have taken to resolve this matter. Be sure to inc ude e entity of staff '- '' members you have contacted. A. Provide a brief, clear statement of your grievance. A... ion. sailer ma be use. m-..murn.two pages (one DC-804 form and one one-sided 872" x 11" page et.173177111M117111. , ou are seeking •/�, .� `. 0 Sea' t, / l ■ OF 4 40 e 44 e I, 302- Peji.cs Ccvat' 4 A C Peit:t tc'Ci' ) t'' - . to *-. ‘, .... ' '7--:, i x..._ __ ___t ei+IGI2S, . ,, is ,). /.I ' it 7% p�I -6 k i CC43 - - F ---siOLT :,,„ Re • ° be- s _73 (2),,-1 Ste. _ .. met oe.- - t -:ft's �, i i,i iii y' ti • •���� / + 1 ` et... ---6..',1.. _�JA i , c-41 C 111 - . t .::-4, b B. List acti s taken and staff you have contacted, before submitting this grievance. ''1),: ., i Your grievance has been received and will be processed in accordance with DC-ADM 804. Signature of Facility Grievance Coordinator Date WHITE-Facility Grievance Coordinator Copy CANARY-File Copy PINK-Action Return Copy GOLDENROD-Inmate Copy Revised April 2005 -1-0:Cte.. Da. ( g, ACC GAda 0.4_ ' - , v� e I i N-C .4 iS3 4 �c7 .._.::: \w .A,_ 1.4 CA DC-804 7 oe.co COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA F•R O FICI■ USE • Y Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS P.O. BOX 598 CAMP HILL, PA 1700 -0598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER 11. ,,.e.,a( OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE Ftd.,Itsk jJLC o . C ITY: DATt: ri _ \L\t FRO (I ". E NAME& `MBER • SI 'I of INMAO _ . _ '- - . t _ WORK SSI NMENT: _ • LNG ' ". laVViT. INSTRUCTIONS: A, - t z ppe.4. ,,... -t- rf t,cik k k aikot -?... 41,0,Ce. -L-- APPEA , M 1 r � �'' ',(L!� 4 c it M j --„ L-)_ &At-Y=2T. ' --(1rIti 1 . , ,.,,,, - G -.--j- CC,Q &cci,..kisx,, r _ e_ .‘C-, 100 .,-,,z e., ‘Ni 1 t C-,1r-N C Vic, 1 IC% IE) - C L z L. a W0 a O(., • P- °T �a a ute_ ee_, a.S1/414.)e.. lA w1r,\,Cl, �-E� E C ,c( C ' x(/z cge. y °� e_, e< kk-'c.S.%,--T 6 . C.)e k ("*..) ,(- Ca't -- ICI • �... Y .. � ��i - _.. es-. -0bQ e„e_ (s. I'' `-)1-420 ---(--57.L.A...)1/4....KLict,t ce,...) becev. ,.)d, G daS. c'''-'Lrtc;r1/4t /1,, A , CC fc.� � ICuJ + l., U kJ-)\--N(..(_ N c A yr-t 7,,,C2, • � PP p--� mac _ . p cast, k(Aw 2 1�.- Pee c_ • j . A s 'm-, c, �. , mot CZ /C C�+tJ ��rSPA-4,� �. _"` ` • 4 r' '� v hl ‘.. c,1 � I « ck e`er_"fiC� ® . f ti ! ht.1m ,. . . 45' Lt d n M. S ..) -t P i S by ' C E „a� 2011 ----�-Final Appeal Decision Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances &Appeals Pennsylvania Department of Corrections P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598 This serves to acknowledge receipt of your appeal to the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals for the grievance noted below. In accordance with the provisions of DC-ADM 804, "Inmate Grievance System Policy",the following response is being provided based on a review of the entire record of this grievance.The review included your initial grievance,the Grievance Officer's response,your appeal to the Facility Manager, the Facility Manager's response, the issues you raised to final review, and (when applicable)any revised institutional responses required as a result of a subsequent remand action by this office. As necessary, input from appropriate Central Office Bureaus(e.g., Health Care Services, Chief Counsel, Office of Special Investigations and Intelligence, etc)may have been solicited in making a determination in response to your issue as well. nmatewName ' Alp honso Pew _ tngtate Number BT-7263 _...............__-. SCI-Filled, t... : _: Smites...................._._.............._......._...... Current 5.C1,. ; Smithfield �'.... € Griunc " 370151 Pul lication I f cable 1�s 5................•....•.....•...•.....•.•:...o �...�.+u��.•...•n..w.... � ......... ....•..n..n.�.s.:)o-•.....•......•. ......._.. n.•n.•.•L .•.....•.w.•.•.• .•...............o •. ..........•_a..n••..••.mu ........ • ....... ......_.. .•.•.n•sw....• IxS�YZvv • 121Uphold Response (UR) ❑ Uphold Inmate (UI) ❑ Uphold in part/Deny in part..................._. It is the decision of the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals to uphold the initial response, uphold the inmate, or Uphold in part/Deny in part. This response will include a brief rationale, summarizing the conclusion, any action taken to resolve the issue s( raised in th rievance and our appeal and relief sought. Response _ ; ', wotdus A review of the record shows that you are filing an appeal based on your claim that the mailroom and business nffirf ctaff tried to sabotage -41 your Iegs1 actions. Specifically that staff did not allow you to anticipate funds while in indigent status for a letteryou wanted to be certified to i respondents. An investigation into the matter reveals that the letter you wanted to be sent certified did not identify that it was a"petition for review". It was not properly marked and the mailroom staff and/or the business office staff did not identify it as such. Due to the fact that you did not mark the envelope accordingly,it was denied in acwNlaince with taligy DC-ADM 803. Policy 803 states that,An inmate will be permitted to anticipate the deposit of funds into his/her account for regular first-class postage only except that:a"Petition for Review"to respondents is the only legal document required to be served by certified mail,return receipt;an inmate may use, but is not required to use,certified mail, return receipt to file a"Petition for Review"with the Court. If the envelope would have been marked properiy designating it as a"petition for review to iespondents",the staff would have processed it. Your claims against staff are unfounded. The denial was in accordance with what you provided and there is no evidence to substantiate our claim that staff tried to sabots a our I al actions. Signature: Dorina Varjael Title: Chief Grievance Officer ' mew aMll& Date: 9-28-2011 DLV/TLW cc: DC-15/Su erintendent Fisher _--› Bah Chn to u don -.�- _ '> Grievance Office 1 To , t,cs e>, g■A,E( CI-116 C e--f- tiocsice t€1 .)-Ctete- 0.7. cA Ge., )■- - J C e-eccizd, Ev4int-(i,- 1- A*-1: -. • . _ la C25 ),io. v L S6a1), 2-0)12- II MN tio 0_ _ '-` ( . 4 • -7, . Lei V`.• DC-804 pepose,....) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA F•R •FF CIA ... S Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 4 Rev 9/2010 RO. BOX 598 GRIEVANCE NUMBER CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0598 OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANCE 1" At PC--mj . ' 4 APPe4A16. C A I Ti • Di Tek :- .,............... ',. • - -• • Y 4•A: 0-eriAT •A ° ‘ Pv 111111 1, . IA tab. I= --- 11. ' ,A...._....... gh._ —.- sa....— 1...J.- _ FRO : ( N , ' TE NAME(&,, MBER)um c . ii, i OF INMA lap ,.., A i il wz,,,:., .. ) ic.. i... ...-..., ,-,1:i ,- N.3- 1116 - v II N ■N 11. ..._,,,_ .1.11,A AA. AT ... ' WO"K 'SSI N ENT: HO SING lti GNMENT: INSTRUCTIONS: L,..„; ..„.... Ap,. . - 4* c4- b --E ■ S-ct, aizrze_ ..-rmimiftillt. . - -=... w ‘I .• ---,3ftez lia12 '' r' ' Are.A..(c)A 1 tk Vqe-t- •ft,:. A- qP -r- gMek,..\eif.,.e8 bei2 it,x: .8.1cdck(2 r..- 6 ivArAitic,...xlct (A) -C-ke,Ge-tto.se„ (- ' - e„,36 .1-xi-- Wr4-ez,,,,. ,brg ,k.qt-A,4,44. acti s' Lme.-C fl-e-c.,V-,s, L 42*,, air2- a Sjsv-, S1,-,e-e--6 tOle-e, c-54-44, -- Zi -, . " . ' - pr C c,Z1- •, ' •€,..,? $4--1,A ., •-. , -ilt C\ ek Grk , • .).-t .„.,cs ce,5 , q„..tt , fki,i Les,u %N,t3) c. ' ,POtik,(C C>:4-z-6 C (21-t --,es1-41€- z(Sj‘r r( p‘ Z--e_citcc, c, ajA pe - t __i, .., c..ie.,x _e_rs A. .-- 1.c.:. .-.-enT..1,,,z1;. c.),tc. 60-Scl-4,;v4:w , . we €7‹,6t:bk,(-- (c56...1( E-r-matT, S , LT , %-,-/is ,,,d ,L -1"%J ...4. --- --11-.) '" ‘Gk- ,..)6, Cek,.cefez, .6 u 'a'46A- cS Cf-ccee, bez. ez, , "fp,pee ce,„cezA.--6z - .he. ck.- -1-5 ,,as) .-- --r-x-6' • -, Let (, -('' (0c) Ti piel, cesas , , ,,, ,44.0,, Pc AC 6.3, -z,(L -0->e- tes s ' - - - - . ...• Ac--dec k_k3 (-- - k----tv_._„, -.--n-102 e_ Is& e-7, firX. .b. -7c\ ck.,(C(`,' •St le S 0 •a-. EA, SEX ).CYZ). L U^?. (c)c.lcc: ft, .., s---6--_• — ,•.7..olor to:E.- - , -.. fe• ..._ ___!.,....- . .. __.. ,- -:...„ - ' .-1.-r.,:-. 11==p -,..........-...- ..- -4.-;..., - - i ink i . (.4.„ ± . . 1 e,r,..ce . c ,ee.,ri 14,1 Gee_ ... , ...,,,e, . _ .--e_ _,- - or e 0...e , - . - 0.- Ill P...• ..- • ill :.... MIL .,., ........... - , , ■ r (1Zt (EP 1 )-------1M-wk,IDi,', 12 Oro-- 111 ", . 00 k--_ e-b- A- r fle-CCe■J6." pa,crs — -.,..,..,,.. :„ \ ...,„ ' .. . ' -, . , r --Z,',...C- IN-.C.±. re-C1 i-e,■)C N P "eATC Cer T,T84 .6. TNLL e2., a Sc ' te-t—pree,„t ce..ke_ ,. se (471,e__ ( v.- . • -,,,,e1 '. • ._ . c.ti a --,. ._,_,,, ,,,• _ . . ...6„._s_.,. ....:...._.- •,tis.„,,,...-1..,. • .r.*,-4,,... -e.,...ky (..)* v cers - . ,.: .-,-,-,. . _ -____ .; ',._ %, _ - . :-- _L-... ',-(SN- 4•'"----,A,:, c•-iv , c '': - ii---'- — --' , 0 1■144§wrkAistemp- -- - .-S- _..e._ --eit-' ---6 Q, , , ..‘,.,, _ _,. .• ...„.,.... . A cs--ttiwaa --m-,e,,, nt-t^ A r.e., r-a•C Xrc- c- -r A> 1-1;‹, -,. Ne t r.C -r c),-,.c--N .----, ...e.- -, .- be„)c ae-Cc526. &kvd,c- Vie, C Ca Se. ► �C, - � ' I 2011 (2-enor ��a 4 Final Areal Decisio,nn _.-- Secretary's Office of II to Grjeva4�ces &Appeals Pennsy'�wa is Depar ment of Corrections P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598 This serves to acknowledge receipt of your appeal to the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals for the grievance noted below. In accordance with the provisions of DC-ADM 804, "Inmate Grievance System Policy", the following response is being provided based on a review of the entire record of this grievance. The review included your initial grievance, the Grievance Officer's response, your appeal to the Facility Manager, the Facility Manager's response, the issues you raised to final review, and (when applicable) any revised institutional responses required as a result of a subsequent remand action by this office. As necessary, input from appropriate Central Office Bureaus (e.g., Health Care Services, Chief Counsel, Office of Special Investigations and Intelligence, etc) may have been solicited in making a determination in response to your issue as well. [ inmate N , Alfonso Pew fi r � �� BT-7263 --.._.._ Y SCI` led nt Smithfield -..._... f,...__..._._..._.. ....._...................... _. _._. }. �+` ,': m__Smitheld < Grievant 374293 DecisJ4d $, OUphold Response 40,44; ❑ Uphold Inmate (UI) tc, r. ❑ Uphold inpart/Deny in part It is the decision of the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals to uphold the initial response, uphold the inmate, or Uphold in part/Deny in part. This response will include a brief rationale, summarizing the conclusion, any action taken to resolve the issue(s) raised in the grievance and your appeal and relief sou•ht. . Rea_PWnS -. A review of the record shows that you are filing an appeal based on your claim that you want a sign in sheet — for receivin. i •'•-nt legal .acks because ou •'• •' __-• -_._�- : _ly. You stated that vou.gGantproof to- -4, show that one was issued to you. An investigation into the matter reveals that you did receive the indigent packet with paper and carbon paper on 7-7-2011. It was also learned that the CCPM stated that the indigent packets are logged in when they are handed out. They are being accounted for when sent to inmates, therefore your request for a separate sheet is not necessary. The staff did not with hold your packet and the Business Manager verified in the record that ou received it. Signature: Donna Varner --44111r— mime Title: ' Chief Grievance Officer Date: ± 10-18-2011 DLV/TLW cc: DC-15/Superintendent Fisher C - - Grievance Office 1' A —R t, GIG -- cc g„ ' -eCC, "" The lz-, `- , - (-E ) • s { DC-804 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA �° ' Part 1 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS j WC i''- ti Rev 912010 P.O. BOX 598 GRIEVANCE N NUMBER CAMP HILL,PA 17001-0598 OFFICIAL INMATE GRIEVANC . ���" . F C A- ,.. €, .. -:� 4 LITY DATE. o: f A . / far • 0. . MATE E & NUMB R +REOFl . ►•TE: WAR , ASSIGNMENT: • V ASS E T A4 �' L INSTRUCTIONS: A0‘...u.. 5161 t1/4` is k -C- a , e b, (oc a sr' ,a(lice, 6-,, 2c,c ed ema mc....x,+q . i.ns zoG c�3E G .x:i, sk5c i (c.6 4(c,,.tiPz.{ ?Set_ ¢tcA-C., 9 tc ti' - e.,ma4zice_i tSits.tti cam\ Nve4ee...E.4%.) CC-¢ - ;ems , �c�� - �`' (f_c31-c"-J - - S , r....), - '0'G..,., CA,4,÷ Z,...XX Vinn' -kV_ _g_Rf,;g) &kV. tA 0'- CI4C-U'") ACC eWS -60 Cak.AtZW.' V44,63 ..t 40 y ,.y ,c, C 1ev t' p e,, G i2 is t C v Cie r�z A-C.e-tZL j-• a6 P ac x e. 2 aL 16% c t , 1, CO p , moo �we ,v_ ^ k-&'�,M SU e.rfz Se,,. -cam 5rit, RR- e--c .. e -1-6 4.1"-w...4._- G. 2• L -.. 9-S.441A, `" -t--. d tie -C-.6 C Z_Ct al-A. T:' - - c,W 2 fie:, • s s2,_• -.)L .� `` Ma Get VG 5 4 a- , yy � 1 r i _ �tY ...,,i n / 1. S . _. ;�y�Y' _ _ S "c' !7 G�r r/ ^^�1 �4w _ c' cwt bAo oa_ g C boc4c- C - ((),S 2011 7 F paea_l Decl ion Secr 's Office of Gn s &Awls -< Pennsylvania Depment oftions P.O. Box 598, 2520 Lisburn Road Camp Hill, PA 17001-0598 This serves to acknowledge receipt of your appeal to the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals for the grievance noted below. In accordance with the provisions of DC-ADM 804, "Inmate Grievance System Policy", the following response is being provided based on a review of the entire record of this grievance. The review included your initial grievance, the Grievance Officer's response, your appeal to the Facility Manager, the Facility Manager's response, the issuesjrou raised to final review, and (when applicable)any revised institutional responses required as a result of a subsequent remand action by this office. As necessary, input from appropriate Central Office Bureaus(e.g., Health Care Services, Chief Counsel, Office of Special Investigations and Intelligence, etc) may have been solicited in making a determination in response to your issue as well. InmatuN"' ,w Alfonso Pew sr)`" BT-7263_........-__-._.....-. { SCI Fled''. Smithfield ..--�, =, . Smithfield �' I Grievance, 373398 --�- Decision ! Uphold Response (UR) ❑ Uphold Inmate (UI) ❑ Uphold in part/Deny in part It is the decision of the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals to uphold the initial response, uphold the inmate, or Uphold in part/Deny in part. This response will include a brief rationale, summarizing the conclusion, any action taken to resolve the issue s raised in the •rievance and our a••eal and relief sou•ht. Respans 4� "� � � ��� . 4: f a ��� �..�'� ��> � � rt a. �,`'� F �' a st.,� v.� A review of the record shows that you are filing an appeal based on our clai • . ou s . • •- •• - - - . • 'ell • —.-,� polic DC-ADM 80 -te Mail and Incomin. P •lications and allow-• • 1- - I I I , •• • • .• ..e -• -lo.es —)i an. copying in indigent status. 4 — An investigation into the matter reveals that p C-ADM 803 only lows for 110.00 worth_of fret postage and/or@<---- opying for an inmate while in indigent statu . inma es are1 eld to tiis standard and utilize this amQiint for their e open court cases as you do. The staff is working in accordance with that policy and providing you with'$10.00 worth of .�-- free postage or copying every Month. It is recommended that you menage your account regarding postage, free envelopes and postage when indigent. You are receiving envelopes to use for sending letters and court documents to the courts. The olic is clear re ardin the allowable amount and our re uest for an exce tion is deniede j Signature: _ Dorina Varner I, Title: _.4 Chief Grievan a Officer - Li Date: '�'--- ------- _ ..�..__......_...---._...........--..........____ -- - 10-18-2011 �— DLV/TLW cc: DC-15/Superintendent Fisher Grievance Office 1 T -'.1--C:' Ct E-7e-i< 6 AV1/41f48 g. g(Aelt-FX2---UNe 1* 'r ' 46 al ' 't-- 'ErilatirL'Q R e C C 2 d S E L CE- 1 A . .. ...._ ..... ii._..„ ,.. . PCG61/4( _ A, tam 114!):, ..'E ' ''.' 7 I-:' ,:':-• .::..-,-:---;-,.: ,., A , att■;,;''',,, ''1,....,'.,• 1'ii:..-' ,"ty,, !A,., .'.,. 11-11101-0111 - 02- e wo. Sg,c zot,.. .-. imis ) • GRIEVANCE NUMBER F -Alf■Z"...141et-' OFFICIAL II ■ - E GRIEVANCE 'kg:t..12■4„ Ft4'■'' ' '' A A.A ' 1-0:);'. .', : "''. ''' ''' -"'.11..,--,''''''''' ' 7■4 ‘.4...'#v,f4.1I FACILITY: DATE1 110)2'444,4 VAJaNiGa_ ,.,,X FP-ibt ti S al ( I a. FRO \K(iN -i E NAME & ,BER) . - .. SI . ,..T! "P,,of INMAT: , - - WORK AS IGNMENT: H Sr G WI .N•1EF. T: ' it■Aew - 11W sib • -a'' '' . •ellinal . ,.,,: .,,,...;,,..,, 1.- : , . ,.-..,,,14, ',:.44-14.-, :" „ ' , `' . . ' - '1,-- ??.. .:---'' • -,-= ' " to o• - ■• 4Z:he S-AP■ ' .. iyeve....zre, „:a.ope ( sva.x. '----'. A-C----,•-y, e_,, LS. -0--- - ffore- ..-cctiat Gt1.-Icrbic...et "a_ Er, ,:2,2.)c .,te ., ,. .41.:.,.ti,-46,,otiti,t- , 16....), . `-' Atlea,cs-ect V k.,34a, C --ccn A - Pe.-43e:feis RA")z C./10- ' , Ot.,,, Z,L V.- Pi z,,, -ck-e 02 1.5("-)z,cy.‘ le,,,2,,r_e., ts„ s.-te-UL "AZ/2 . *iii. 64t-N.L, ctet-ta,,--ceeZF, C tit.StV.-t d-G-4-el-e-Zr!es)>, Cl-,e, , tt.-t, -6;13 --6-e oat .r...( 21e..4)....c.e. '_ •.-42 z-C.C. 2,--E- c..4. ' 1111111 c-AI-1 • c cc.as'‘-, sc.p,) c-6-bcptc_c_c -6 \k g-, . ,,- 4).. . • cp64k 61--- - , -( Pct PCL cc ''N*) Lers ,C tQeo..3&) C---,.-14,6ct----'=F :-..z ...ti..0.3.. m. 1-re.,,E ip.-cto--0. -,e, r) ..)-K._•-e.,..t,..k.)e, ,toz.., ,,,,s .___ t.kc., ,, ... . AA an. _ ...t , 1 B,r-Le.,,,z,....xLe ........1s4.,...)c../4:- Tz. S, , ..._.elii _ L---,e, --- -...n„,p, caL"z—c--e, APP'e" , -- '''.-' '‘‘t-CT.4 . --TV-.)_ ,... ,,,is. a ,c),...ez -ef...,,e , ,tekt e,..6. .bkLts(.... -c-e., /NC ...A.. k^ v-,k.:. j o-e pf-4-f-cs (J,i-io(Lkxi Li sA, C-1:1,-,Gez, Lk.SA 14C.0 Cc -'' &i.-1,, ,‘,,Ztatifkre, ,-Crz.4(c_cle-'sz Pi IT,A "exelec..„ -Eskez ,_ ,. 2t4 = ig:)7 ...L., 1,---e--)e, (2--er›e."6.,,Cc-t_t 6 ee),./ sL4. :6 --tc.)-__ i2e-16(-(- cr..,,,...6e-t- sz.. c.)(asse c,t \i--- i olaa C pro.ceeck,tac e.....3.-- eceszk. :7-------. ' ..:- ' ----..f1;-1 ....777- -... •-- ''. --- - , ,, _. . -- -.-! s---. -- --. .€1.-,Re 6, ** . - ' -I.S. Pat Or-42-3 o GeL1/4.5 L..)Ltu-, ^"2-L Li (e„. .e.CPerz,tya& ) C.),..rit --A PeC, -,C;', , pQ,-S c_se, L ie.c.s.:e. C. Fe,pees. ) (c-cc - pep-ea& 4--eeC i' let)-S , e"-Nz„Se. ,2)' M" • ." -.r..0,..t5. pc...s- se • = kad. -z- tt Pe-- (% _A-Z--,-3.(Ca ,4 (2) The- €.■-lbe■g-f._ a.'•'' t..k..g. 4-*.-- .- e_.Ai' k ct Sejt- (1-1e-tt .)-f-C,Cm. 04zr-te_e_ a-ti- - 6,--02(1. dc-tc-__ _R__ak--(L. c:SA /..t)-(--- • -----— . - el- - ;-4,7 Z; .. . ' ' "A, (A4.., ,s(20?.A.3---• ?"1-40,1/4ez --6C? kg- A .Eest,tlzfe C . -fr.) cs."3G7 'Lp. -ON&cz__ C.A.A./",-) /t--.&-e-- I.. view ,..--., - - ._ - ..-- ,..,:-.7.,,, :;•-,--: ,:-.....y,.,-, .- ,i,-.' : --- ° ---.7-- --, ,---7,.7...;;.2:',-z-7--- ----.. - ,- .-._;-:, ; ,...----,-----,-, -giAcCC e Ncc etc( 6,--62c.c. ercu Z BeLk c A 04-t1 —� 2012 Cad 11■10 m k%k 2_012, Final Appeal Decision Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances &Appeals Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 This serves to acknowledge receipt of your appeal to the Secretary's Office of Inmate Grievances and Appeals for the grievance noted below. In accordance with the provisions of DC-ADM 804, "Inmate Grievance System Policy", the following response is being provided based on a review of the entire record of this grievance. The review included your initial grievance, the Grievance Officer's response, your appeal to the Facility Manager, the Facility Manager's response, the issues you raised to final review, and (when applicable)any revised institutional responses required as a result of a subsequent remand action by this office. As necessary, input from appropriate Central Office Bureaus (e.g., Health Care Services, Chief Counsel, Office of Special Investigations and Intelligence, etc) may have been solicited in making a determination in response to your issue as well. Inmate Name Alfonso Pew Inmate Number BT-7263 SCI Fled __......... ........................... _..__......... 7:. Smithfield 1 Current SCI: Frackville Grievance# 401227 Publication(if. „?licable) Decision: ©Uphold Response (UR) ❑ Uphold Inmate (UI) .._.__ .0..._0.._Uphold in part/Deny in part....................................................._._._. � i I!Itfty the Secretary's Office of k..n t3 G.:ov- �. ..,-..-d A po rt.s uphold`he in...I__ ry c........_............. ..._N__..._ d} ......_....._ IS the decision of u�c SecrC�a/y J vlriCc w 1/u/laa� v'//cva/n.cJ u.,...�N}..,8w to u�..,w,u 1t.21/ „pO;TS:,, rF,h.0 ho inmate, or Uphold in part/Deny in part. This response will include a brief rationale, summarizing the conclusion, any action taken to resolve the issue(s)raised in the .rievance and your appeal and relief sought l2es once A review of the record shows that you are filing an appeal based on your claim that you have been the sub�Ject of –4 I retaliatory conduct sabotage of your legal proceedings and access to the courts. 4-- After reviewing the information provided, there are several different attachments you provided related to different issues. All of which you claim are part of this retaliatory conduct. The issue you presented in the initial grievance related to sending out mail was addressed in the responses and it was determined that there was no staff negligence or retaliatory conduct involved. This review finds no evidence to substantiate your claims against staff. Your request for payment of$2.30 for postage is denied. Signature: 1 Dorina Varner Wig ALAPI Title: I Chief Grievance Officer Date: I 7-11-2012 �-- DLV/TLW cc: DC-15/Superintendent Fisher/Collins Grievance Office • d R Corir>rrrr>ronWeartb Court of Venugptbania Kristen W.Brown Pennsylvania Judicial Center Prothonotary 601 Commonwealth Avenue,Suite 2100 Michael Krimmel,Esq. P.O.Box 69185 Chief Clerk of Commonwealth Court Harrisburg,PA 17106-9185 July 1, 2013 www.pacourts.us CERTIFICATE OF REMITTAUREMAND OF RECORD TO: David D. Buell Prothonotary RE: Tabansi et al v. DOC et al 1153 CD 2012 Trial Court: Cu.mberland County Court of Common Pleas Trial Court Docket No: BT-7263 12-1717 Annexed hereto pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure 2571 and 2572 is the entire record for the above matter. Original Record contents: Item Filed Date ' Description Remand/Remittal Date: ORIGINAL RECIPIENT ONLY- Please acknowledge receipt by signing,dating,and returning the enclosed copy of this certificate to our office. Copy recipients (noted below) need not acknowledge receipt. Respec II Commonwealth Court Filing Office -n Tabansi et al v. DOC et al July 1, 2013 1153 CD 2012 Letter to: Buell, David D. Acknowledgement of Certificate of Remittal/Remand of Record(to be returned): Signature Date Printed Name IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Ta:bansi, Appellant V. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Jeffrey A. Beard Secretary of Corrections, Shirly M. Smeal Secretary of Corrections, John Wetzel Secretary of Corrections, Dorina Varner Chief Grievance Officer, C") H. Clifford O'Hara, Director, James C. -10M Barnacle, Director, Franklin D. Tennis, —M C= M B.(Brian) Thompson, R. (Robert) Marsh, Ms. Grove, C. Graw, Kurt Granlund Unit Manager, Lieutenant Barnes, Lieutenant Kensanger, Correctional Officer Gilliam, > Correctional Officer Smith, Correctional Officer Ryder, Correctional Officer Taylor, Major - 171 Morris of Unit Managers, and : No. 1153 C.D. 2012 Marirosa Lamas : Submitted: March 8, 2013 BEFORE: HONORABLE BERNARD L. McGINLEY, Judge . HONORABLE MARY HANNAH LEAVITT, Judge HONORABLE ANNE E. COVEY, Judge OPINION NOT REPORTED MEMORANDUM OPINION BY JUDGE McGINLEY FILED: April 9, 2013 Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi (Pew) appeals the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County (common pleas court) that dismissed Pew's complaint based upon the common pleas court's determination that it lacked jurisdiction. On March 19, 2012, Pew, an inmate housed in a Pennsylvania Department of Corrections' (DOC) facility, commenced an action in the common pleas court against DOC and nineteen of its employees ranging from the Secretary to individual corrections officers. Pew alleged that he was in continuous, imminent danger of serious bodily and physical harm as a result of harassment and retaliation by the named defendants. Pew specifically alleged that the defendants blocked the preparation and filing of lawsuits, refused to mail legal papers, took his legal materials, confiscated religious, cultural, and political property, and denied access to law books and legal assistance. Pew alleged that the reason for this was the desire of DOC officials to prevent Pew from exposing prison complaints and abuse by DOC officials to the public. To that end, Pew also alleged that DOC officials isolated him in "super maximum segregation" to prevent him from communicating and corresponding with the public. In the complaint, Pew also detailed a list of grievances, for which he exhausted administrative remedies, for retaliatory conduct whereby prison officials denied him the use of a stapler to assemble legal documents, for a DOC policy that violated his religious beliefs because he was not permitted to wear an undershirt and socks on his way to shower, for retaliatory conduct which denied him the use of the library, for a DOC policy which limited the amount of mail an inmate may send per month, retaliatory conduct which denied him "underclothing," for retaliatory conduct that denied him a flat screen television, the denial of two "legal" typewriters, typewriter ribbon, and correction tape, the temperature of his segregation cell and the delay/denial of electrical sockets to plug in the typewriter, placement in a special cell with a metal aperture, the delay and denial of"slides" 2 for his feet, the denial of grievance forms, unsafe bird feces and dangerous ground paving in the segregated exercise yard, for DOC employees abusing authority by lying on reports, fabricating misconducts and playing repeated tape recordings over the cell intercom system to harass Pew, for a correctional officer banging a cell door to harass him, for DOC allowing a correctional officer to sexually stalk him, for confiscating personal property including legal materials, religious items, and cultural and political property including hygiene articles, for grievances concerning religious practice, bed sheets, cell ventilation, and medical care and treatment. Pew made claims under the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions. With respect to the Pennsylvania Constitution, Pew made claims based on Article I, Section 1 concerning the possession and protection of legal, cultural, political, and religious property; Article I, Section 2, concerning the right to safety; Article 1, Section 3, concerning the right to religious freedom; Article 1, Section 7, concerning the right to write and address any subject; Article 1, Section 11, concerning the right of access to courts; Article I, Section 13, concerning cruel punishment; Article 1, Section 20, concerning redress against DOC without fear of reprisal and retribution; and Article I, Section 26, concerning the violation of civil rights. He made non-constitutional claims of intentional malicious conduct and intentional infliction of emotional distress. He further alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Pew sought the following relief- 59. . . . . 3 (a) A declaratory judgment . . . that the acts omissions described herein violates plaintiff [Pew] rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States. (b) A preliminary and permanent injunction ordering Defendants [DOC] to expunge Plaintiff [Pew] Falsified Report Misconduct history and to stop retaliatory conduct and harassment. (c) Compensatory Damages for the amount of $25,000 each defendant separately and jointly for retaliatory conduct of Plaintiff [Pew] for activism against DOC conditions of confinement. (d) Punitive Damages for the amount of $50,000 each defendant separately and jointly for violation of rights [for] the intentional conduct. (e) Jury Trial demand on all claims. (f) Plaintiff[Pew] cost of suit and litigation cost. (g) All additional relief the Court views fair, just, proper and equitable to redress the violations of Plaintiff [Pew] rights. Complaint, March 19, 2012, Paragraph No. 59 at 12. Along with the Complaint, Pew filed an Affidavit of Imminent Danger of Serious Bodily and Physical Harm in which he asserted that he was in imminent danger of serious bodily and physical harm. He alleged that he was transferred to a "super maximum mental unit" called the Secured Special Needs Unit with no exercise or showers since July 2011. He further asserted that he suffered from hypertension and was denied treatment and medication. Pew also asserted that he suffered from "sciatica nerve damage, sciatica, and iliac disc" and was denied medication as well as other health aids. Affidavit of Imminent Danger 4 of Serious Bodily and Physical Harm, January 31, 2012, (Affidavit), Paragraph F at 16. Pew also asserted that he was subjected to the following: (1) Torture Chair (8 hours) (2) Torture Cell #1 and #2 (21 days) (3) Torture RACC Belt (2 times) (4) Torture Food Loaf(2 times) x (7 days) (5) Denial Food Trays (4 times) Affidavit, Paragraph G at 16. He also alleged that DOC officers used another inmate who was a sexual predator to sexually harass him and make physical threats of violence against him. He alleged that his complaints about this treatment led to retaliatory discipline. Pew also applied for in forma pauperis status. By order dated May 9, 2012, the common pleas court dismissed the complaint on the basis that the complaint purported to be a federal civil rights action for which the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction. The common pleas court determined: If Plaintiffs [Pew] Complaint presents a cognizable federal 1983 claim, then jurisdiction is appropriate in a federal court. To present such a claim, the court looks to two essential elements: (1) whether the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law; and (2) whether this conduct deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. . . . . Here, Plaintiff [Pew] complains of the actions of prison officials acting in their official capacities, whom it is well settled are acting under the color of state law. . . . 5 As to the second element, the plaintiff [Pew] must establish the existence of a protected life, liberty, or property interest, and the deprivation of that protected interest by state action. . . . Here, Plaintiff [Pew] . . . alleges the `taking of legal material, religious items, cultural and political property including hygiene [sic] articles.'. . . . As such, he has alleged the deprivation of material protected by the First Amendment of the federal Constitution by prison staff. Thus, it appears Plaintiff [Pew] has pleaded the requisite facts to establish federal court jurisdiction of his claim. Accordingly, this court's order dismissing Plaintiff's [Pew] Complaint should be affirmed. In conclusion, this court has endeavored to properly analyze Plaintiffs [Pew] claims, such as they are, but as a pro se litigant, Plaintiff[Pew] has assumed the risk that his pleadings will be facially inadequate, or as here, largely unintelligible. And so, having filed a Complaint that appears to this court to be a federal civil rights action, proper jurisdiction lies in a Federal District Court rather than the Court of Common Pleas and this court did not err entering an order of dismissal. Common Pleas Court Opinion, September 7, 2012, at 2-3. Pew contends that actions brought under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and filed in a state court are subject to concurrent state and federal jurisdiction such that the common pleas court must entertain his complaint.' In Commonwealth ex rel. Saunders v. Creamer, 512 A.2d 454, 456 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1973), this Court recognized "the concurrent jurisdiction and duty of state courts to protect the rights guaranteed under the Federal Constitution." ' This Court's review is limited to a determination of whether constitutional rights were violated, or whether the common pleas court abused its discretion or committed an error of law. Pew v. Mechling, 929 A.2d 1214, 1217 n. 4 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007). 6 Similarly, in Balshy v. Rank,, 507 Pa. 384, 396, 490 A.2d 415, 420-421 (1985), our Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that, an action brought in the Pennsylvania state court system under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for money damages, was properly commenced in the Courts of Common Pleas: "We hold today the clear intent of the General Assembly is that actions against the Commonwealth or its officers acting in their official capacity for money damages based on tort liability are outside the original jurisdiction of Commonwealth Court and are properly commenced in the Courts of Common Pleas." Clearly, jurisdiction for actions brought against state officials acting under color of state law under 42 U.S.C. §1983 does not lie exclusively within the federal courts. Pew correctly asserts that the common pleas court erred when it dismissed his complaint on this basis.' Accordingly, this Court reverses the order of the common pleas court. This case is remanded to the common pleas court. BERNARD L. McGINLEY, J 2 In its brief the DOC essentially concedes that the common pleas court erred when it held that it lacked jurisdiction. DOC argues that the complaint should be dismissed pursuant to the "three strikes" provision of Section 1915(g) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. §1915(g). DOC cites a federal statute. Because Pew brought this action in state court, state law rather than federal law governs the procedures under which the action will be litigated. Jae v. Good, 946 A.2d 802 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008). Therefore, the law cited by DOC is inapplicable here. 7 IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi, Appellant V. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Jeffrey A. Beard Secretary of Corrections, Shirly M. Smeal Secretary of Corrections, John Wetzel Secretary of Corrections, Dorina Varner Chief Grievance Officer, H. Clifford O'Hara, Director, James C. Barnacle, Director, Franklin D. Tennis, B.(Brian) Thompson, R. (Robert) lbr-:at, I Marsh, Ms. Grove, C. Graw, Kurt Granlund Unit Manager, Lieutenant Ze Barnes, Lieutenant Kensanger, Correctional Officer Gilliam, cr) Correctional Officer Smith, Correctional Officer Ryder, Correctional Officer Taylor, Major Morris of Unit Managers, and No. 1153 C.D. 2012 Marirosa Lamas ORDER AND NOW, this 9th day of April, 2013, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County in the above-captioned matter is reversed, and this case is remanded to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County. Jurisdiction relinquished. BERNARD L. McGINLEY, Judge Certified from the Record APR - 9 2013 and Order Exit 'upreme Court of fienn5ptbania Irene M.Bizzoso,Esq. 601 Commonwealth Avenue,Suite4500 Prothonotary Middle District P.O.Box 62575 Elizabeth E.Zisk Harrisburg,PA 17106 Chief Clerk (717)787-6181 November 8, 2013 www.pacourts.us RE: Tabansi, S., Pet v. Cumberland County CCP 172 MM 2013 Intermediate Docket No: 468 MD 2013 Trial Court Docket No: 12-1717 Dear Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew This is to acknowledge receipt of Commonwealth Court's Order transferring the appeal to the Supreme Court for the above-captioned matter. Accordingly,your new docket number is 172 MM 2013. Please reference this number for any future correspondence. C) r,a —rp c Very truly yours, im _n Office of the Prothonota ry .�.'. ' °' /hms cc: Buell, David D., Prothonotary cC3 -e -11 A. Taylor Williams, Esq. = • ) : 'upreme Court of Venuoptbauia Irene M.Bizzoso,Esq. 601 Commonwealth Avenue,Suite 4500 Prothonotary Middle District ry P.O.Box 62575 Elizabeth E.Zisk Harrisburg,PA 17106 Chief Clerk (717)787-6181 November 8, 2013 www,pacourts.us RE: Tabansi, S., Pet v. Cumberland County CCP 172MM2013 Intermediate Court Docket No: 468 MD 2013 Trial Court: Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas Trial Court Docket No: 12-1717 Dear Attorney Williams This is to advise that the below listed item(s) was/were received in the above-captioned matter. "Petition for Mandamus Relief" Please note: per Commonwealth Court order dated October 16, 2013, this matter was transferred to the Supreme Court. An original and two (2) copies of either the Answer,or a letter stating that an Answer will not be filed,is required to be filed within fourteen(14)days from the date of this notice. An additional three (3) days may be added if service was effectuated by mail. See Rule Pa.R.A.P. 121(e). In order to facilitate the newly instituted electronic records management system,the Office of the Prothonotary requests that all filers leave the original copy of any document submitted for filing unbound. All remaining copies of answers should be bound in compliance with Pa.R.A.P. 124 (a)(5). In addition to the paper copies of the items listed above, an electronic copy provided on Compact Discs (CDs) will be accepted and would be appreciated. Acceptable electronic formats, at this time, are PDFs, TIFFs, and Word documents. Said disc should be accompanied by an averment that the material on the CD is a complete and accurate representation of the paper version. Very truly yours, Office of the Prothonotary /hms cc: Buell, David D., Prothonotary Michael Krimmel, Esq., Chief Clerk of Commonwealth Court Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew / CC7,- 2.00 ' ' --- -/ \‘. P(.__.-,,\ a ifiTeiln \ / /7/1 l ) iry_ 'L.,,..„A L 1 , - v,., r,.._•c.-. , ..i2 I . ( -::„±L.,(0,..,CD. ,-) V/ L.C" - (C _. _ _....___ ...._. . e t_. ...----, , C1/ —L4k4' --i:i. ' - ( k ti ff._ m i\ IC ) .1 ' .(------). Ir_ 'i'---1 ''' --r - --- -C-7,- --)1\:: A ' \■ : - . ..'--?_.1,. ''''' .'•7---)1‘ , k., C_C ,.) ."\,\ii_ • 1 (A.,. :7 / CL_____ rr ) ...., - - -- — . Xs* _ r. k-_-_-_ ti, . ...). +, , -----77:— q k"--- ,--- "TV) (712' , (.. It i t Cm ILLC I Q-' , ‘\__ \- -,._,,•- ,,,---, - (_, c .2- , . ( ' \-\--r - C Y , . (. c_-- tc„-- cm,- _ C___ „I , c--; d: -------e- - •-.....-...., ‘‘,...___ , ' L sh"'4 \'- , ---._, C ( _. C i — ■------C' \^":C$. .7-k . .:Z ..(_ , , .,._ C. ,,. r- s -—e.,_'\ /i\ C-- ---Th 6( i -S.,). I*ti l t o.C,—-(-'N\,\ 7,\• to, .\,+ - -- C,.--A-_+•--, (. -- , --- ! - CC rC Th/Nf-krA ( 1 ------r- . -----,, '' :r::NI-Tbec_cnUR ' CC)'VV\AW Cr\-k)\ZA-S att. ,,, (11.* CLA.P\i' , , `o,_ .'l' i-) - '‘ EV■1 Vi A-1ND „il‘ - gs et, Le ) i Niuksk r \ •' -to Iv . _ .L-, A el et,,.. ,i) ----Ca ' ( --- --• I („„,...„ . „--- --- t , _ ,„, ........ Ai, w tzt a lb ' ( ,4 , ' • .., _ 1-6 1 ,4- - \II fen , I i -0 • ....- 7, rrl efra "Ti r-n__.. --;\l'AS ' f■■■■,p,- ---, ,r- r; f • ,,Q' ■, \ C) - . = CO '-'0--;4 i, ,{- _ .- , gra IIP - ' 0 ,,, \ v3.) lit -_. (4' =CD — ,.\ fI' s , _ ..., ,-1 / ' 5,= -,7:‘ 106,0p • ■ ' 1.6.0' .!.11■"! It& _ -31i- ' i ii- lIZ — —— f. it ei A144 A A...liata. r-e,L .-4- ._k C-Q We; -6E1 v4 . _t...,, --Ec, ,,,, — ts 4:. dtic .? \ietC' tA 1-7, A f t ‘ ,. .'"' - % _____ 4 v \\\;. k ) v irsi,i.- --, , ' ,.._J.,■,_.1 a 1.'._ _____1,..--'7 t ,.° - ' ,■,_, e, r_74% f\AI ci C.,ere_ \, ■, L Cx - wCLf be_, a_ -v---er__ ,(- 0 _ , . ,... , i 1, \f , q , -----'--- AS 41P0,1110 /0 - ri Milb■ V17\ \‘ \be 9 ; OZS _(-Cif2g:(A .1 --VICre)\, N gelL. L ,,,,, ( „ • ,, .__ , , o CC' , C__OrL r,_ ' s.V--.-‘4t ---T- \VI*A . ' 3 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI A/K/A : No. 172 MM 2013 ALFONSO PERCY PEW, 01� 1'1 Petitioner V. CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Respondent ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 13th day of January, 2014, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED. -n rn '� `-� -„ ' � C_) X>C . =C:) ... r s f 1/10abeth E. Zisk A O3/214 Attest: Chief C eerrK Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ALFONSO PERCY PEW : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF a/k/a SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFF • V. • PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT • OF CORRECTIONS, • JEFFREY A. BEARD, ET AL. • DEFENDANTS : 12-1717 CIVIL TERM I 4y r/. RDER OF COURT AND NOW, this /" day of February, 2014, the Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel is DENIED. By the Court, (. Albert H. Maslan ' Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi, Pro se, BT7263 Box A Bellefonte, PA 16823-0820 i 1ed sal op 0.1144 ogh c zea rn rn co �T N N (f) c_._ ALFONSO PERCY PEW : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF a/k/a SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFF • • V. • PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, • • JEFFREY A. BEARD, ET AL. DEFENDANTS : 12-1717 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ,2 day of February, 2014, the Plaintiff's Pro se Motion to Re-Instate Complaint and Commence Action Within 30 Days is GRANTED. The Sheriff of Cumberland County is DIRECTED to serve the Complaint filed on March 19, 2012. By the Court, Albert H. Maslan / Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi, Pro se, BT7263 Box A typi ied Bellefonte, PA 16823-0820 Ur x/49 / Sheriff -in bin 048 sal c m` '*1 PI 73 CO -<> < —L7 "mo o >C) - SCE i-_ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI, • a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • Plaintiff, • -rr;�� .,-+ -i v. : No. 12-1717 t' r • C5 1 PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF : CORRECTIONS, et al•, : • Defendants • Civil Action DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE PENDING MOTION TO REVOKE PLAINTIFF'S IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS AND NOW, come the Defendants, by and through their counsel, Joseph G. Fulginiti, Assistant Counsel to the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, and hereby move this Honorable Court to stay the proceedings and the Defendants' obligation to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint pending the resolution of the simultaneously filed Motion to Revoke Plaintiffs In Forma Pauperis status, and aver as follows: 1. On March 19, 2012 Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi, a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew ("Plaintiff') commenced an action in the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas against the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections ("the Department") and nineteen of its employees. 2 2. Plaintiff generally alleged that he was harmed as a result of constant harassment and retaliation. 3. By Order dated May 9, 2012 the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas dismissed Plaintiff's original Complaint on the basis that the pleading purported to be a civil rights action for which the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction. 4. Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to the aforementioned Order on May 22, 2012 to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. 5. After the submission of briefs, the Commonwealth Court issued a Memorandum Opinion on April 9, 2013 reversing the Order of the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas and remanded the case. 6. The Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas subsequently ordered that the Complaint be served, and service was effectuated upon the named Defendants on February 18, 2014. 7. The Defendants now move this Honorable Court to once again dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint as prohibited by the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") due to his status as an abusive litigator. 8. Defendants are simultaneously filing a Motion to Revoke the Plaintiff's In Forma Pauperis Status and Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, pursuant to Section 6602(f) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 Pa. C.S. § 6602(f). 3 9. Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request that the Court stay their obligation to file their responsive pleading to the Complaint pending the outcome of their Motion. 10. Plaintiff is proceeding in this matter pro se, and his concurrence in the filing of this Motion was not sought by the undersigned counsel. See Cumberland County Local Rule of Court 208.3(a)(9). WHEREFORE, Defendants respectfully request that the Court stay their obligation to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint pending disposition of the Defendants Motion to Revoke Plaintiff's In Forma Pauperis Status and Dismiss the Complaint. Respectfully submitted, Office of General Counsel Joseph G. ' ul• • 1, A : stant Counsel Attorney ID s.• i :039 Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Phone No.• (717) 728-7763 Fax No.• (717) 728-0307 E-mail:josfulgini @pa.gov Date: February 27, 2014 4 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI, • a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • Plaintiff, • v. • No. 12-1717 • PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF • CORRECTIONS, et al., • Defendants • Civil Action CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am depositing in the U.S. mail a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Stay Proceedings to be served upon the following person(s) in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail addressed as follows: Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, BT-7263 SCI-Mahanoy 301 Morea Road Frackville, PA 17932 L!! , Renee J. RA,erts Legal Assistant Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Phone No.: (717) 728-7763 Fax No.• (717) 728-0307 Date: February 27, 2014 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI, • a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • !" ,�. • • °> �. Plaintiff, F r v. : No. 12-1717 PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF : CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants : Civil Action DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO REVOKE PLAINTIFF'S INFORMA PAUPERIS STATUS AND DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO THE PRISON LITIGATION REFORM ACT AND NOW, come the Defendants, by and through their counsel, Joseph G. Fulginiti, Assistant Counsel to the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, and hereby move this Honorable Court to revoke Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status and to dismiss his Complaint with prejudice pursuant to the provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, and for the reasons stated below: Relevant Procedural History 1. On March 19, 2012 Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi, a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew ("Plaintiff') commenced an action in the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas against the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections ("the Department") and nineteen of its employees. 2 arising in whole or in part under Federal or State law with respect to the conditions of confinement or the effects of actions by a government party on the life of an individual confined in prison." 9. Section 6602(e) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, entitled "Dismissal of litigation," states that [n]otwithstanding any filing fee which has been paid, the court shall dismiss prison conditions litigation at any time, including prior to service on the defendant, if the court determines any of the following: ... (2) The prison conditions litigation is frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or the defendant is entitled to assert a valid affirmative defense, including immunity, which if asserted, would preclude the relief." 10. Section 6602(f) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, entitled "Abusive litigation," permits a court to dismiss prison conditions litigation "[i]f the prisoner has previously filed prison conditions litigation and: (1) three or more of these prior civil actions have been dismissed pursuant to subsection (e)(2) [of the Prison Litigation Reform Act]." Plaintiff has a long and prodigiously unsuccessful litigation history against the Department and its employees; a review of the Department's litigation database reveals that Plaintiff has filed over 70 lawsuits during the time of his incarceration. 4 g. Pew v. White, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket No. 94-4811, which was dismissed as frivolous and is available on the Federal Court's Electronic Filing System; h. Pew v. Pavicic, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket No. 94-4821, which was dismissed as frivolous and is available on the Federal Court's Electronic Filing System; 12. This Honorable Court can take judicial notice of the prior dismissals of the Plaintiff's state and federal actions for purposes of determining that he is an abusive litigator as defined by the PLRA. 13. Although there is an exception to the abusive litigation provision in Section 6602(f) where the prisoner seeks preliminary injunctive relief or a temporary restraining order "which makes a credible allegation that the prisoner is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury," 42 Pa. C.S. § 6602(f)(2), none of Plaintiff's speculative allegations credibly indicate that he is in such danger. 14. To fall within the exception, the danger must be imminent at the time the complaint is filed. Abdul-Akbar v. McKelvie, 239 F.3d 307, 312 (3rd Cir. 2001). See also Pruden v. Superintendent, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41715, *5 (M.D. Pa. May 28, 2008) ("The `imminent danger' exception is available `for 6 genuine emergencies,' where `time is pressing' and `a threat...is real and proximate'.") (citing Lewis v. Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 531 (7th Cir. 2002)) 15. However, the Court "need not accept any and all allegations of injury as sufficient to forestall application of the three strikes provision." Gibbs v. Cross, 160 F.3d 962, 967 (3rd Cir. 1998). The Court can discredit such allegations as "clearly baseless." Id. In Gibbs v. Roman, 116 F.3d 83, 86-87 (3d Cir. 1997), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held: If the defendant, after service, challenges the allegations of imminent danger..., the district court must then determine whether the plaintiff's allegation of imminent danger is credible...in order for the plaintiff to proceed on the merits IFP. Of course, if the defendant disproves the charge that the plaintiff was placed in imminent danger..., then the threshold criterion of § 1915(g) will not have been satisfied and the plaintiff may not proceed absent the payment of the requisite filing fee.... In resolving a contested issue of imminent danger, the district court may rely upon evidence supplied by sworn affidavits or depositions, or, alternatively, may hold a hearing. 16. In the instant Complaint Plaintiff makes only general and baseless allegations that he is currently under imminent danger of serious bodily harm. See Complaint, 114. 17. Significantly, the bulk of the allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint concern only procedural concerns that have arisen relative to grievance responses 7 he has received and his unsuccessful efforts to appeal misconduct sanctions. Id., generally. 18. Plaintiff makes several suspect allegations regarding physical torture he has endured, however, these allegations recite verbatim the allegations made in the original Complaint filed nearly two full years ago; clearly Plaintiff cannot meet the exacting standard of imminent harm by rehashing unsupported allegations first made several years ago. 19. Because Plaintiff has had three or more civil lawsuits dismissed as frivolous pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act, and because Plaintiff has failed to meet the imminent harm exception to the PLRA, this Honorable Court can dismiss the instant action, or alternatively, simply revoke the Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status and force Plaintiff to pay the full filing fee before the matter is permitted to proceed. 20. The Commonwealth Court recently directed that when a prisoner's IFP status has been revoked pursuant to Section 6602(f), the proper procedure is to provide the prisoner with the opportunity to pay the required fees; if the prisoner is able to pay the fees, the case may proceed, if he is not the case may be dismissed. Lopez v. Haywood, 41 A.3d 184, 188-189 (Pa. Cmwlth 2012). See Tabansi v. Director of Correctional Industries, 392 CD 2013 (Pa. Cmwlth, November 19, 2013). 8 21. In accordance with Lopez and Tabansi, the Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court issue an order revoking Plaintiff's IFP status and provide Plaintiff with a list of costs and fees incurred in connection with this litigation and direct Plaintiff to pay the required fees within 30 days or this case shall be dismissed with prejudice. 22. Plaintiff is proceeding in this matter pro se, and his concurrence in the filing of this Motion was not sought by the undersigned counsel. See Cumberland County Local Rule of Court 208.3(a)(9). 9 WHEREFORE, the Defendants respectfully request that this Honorable Court grant the Motion and revoke Plaintiff's IFP status; if and when Plaintiff fails to pay the required filing fees within 30 days, Defendants' respectfully request that the Court dismiss the matter with prejudice. Respectfully submitted, Office of General Counsel 4° orrep G lgin A :'stant Counsel Attorney 18039 Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Phone No.• (717) 728-7763 Fax No.• (717) 728-0307 E-mail:josfulgini @pa.gov Date: February 27, 2014 10 • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF FAYETTE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION • ALFONSO PERCY PEW, Plaintiff, v. • CAROL A. SCIRE, et al. , Defendant. No. 2682 of 2005:4'4•D. r STATEMENT IN LIEU OF OPINION r w WAGNER, J. AND NOW, this 21st day of December, 2005, pursuant to Pa.R.A. P. 1925 (a) , we hereby submit the following statement in lieu of opinion in support of our order •of December 8, 2005, wherein we granted the preliminary objections of the defendant pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6602 (f) (1) and (2) , • Y abusive litigation; and, being satisfied that the pleadings did not contain a credible alldgation of imminent danger of serious bodily injury. BY TH COU T: ATTEST: / ,J. Prothonotar y T r STDCOPY • . . � 1 �E EXHIBIT 11117•T 0 NOTARY A lw«.♦-u s..y....... ..... D. vw ......... L J UIV-L7-1790 ii•L+i rnur+ +u 171 L i.1'+'+JCJOI r.of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TS6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ALFONSO PERCY PEW x CIVIL ACTION 1993 v. �ietk FittCi� � . �''`�' R. COX cp. Cllr. 93-4128 BY r LUDWIG, J. August !e1 ,1993 Plaintiff has filed a tiro ag 42 V.S.C. §1983 civil rights complaint against a sergeant at the State Correctional Institution at Graterford. Plaintiff is alleging that the defendant violated his constitutional rights because he never returned plaintiffis television set. With his complaint, plaintiff filed a request for leave to proceed in forma uauperia. As it appears he is unable to pay the cost of commencing this action, leave to proceed in forma mane- is is granted. Plaintiff is alleging that the defendant failed to return his television set when he was transferred to another prison. "An unauthorized intentional deprivation of property by a state employee does not constitute a violation of the procedural requirements of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if a meaningful postdeprivation remedy is available." fUdson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 (1984) . Since the prison has a grievance procedure and Pennsylvania has a tort claim statute which appears to apply to property claims, a §1983 EXHIBIT JUN-1V-1b 11:41 IRUN U tl(l(J4(bUb( r.r� ,.,. action is not appropriate. See 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8550; Jones v. Waters, 570 F.Supp. 1292, 1298 (E.D. Pa. 1983) . Therefore, plaintiff's complaint will ba dismissed as frivolous pursuant to 28 V.S.G. §1915(d) . 1 0' K tiM1r4 '• Yi `yT 1� n T �^ �L. !1 Yt'�jtk`t�,"'c c Xf ; h� Y !a - +.:: 4r lti '� K i''i {. ?,Zi-9 X yPi i. • r ..3 `i1C °.,;: i i;Stiic ittg�lY 1�YJt: -Z td ♦--, v L tt.,t.,:.*r_, ,,,i.o _. '� n � .� s ,J.� `� � t�` z� • . i�� t�'+'.. k p .r t� 1r. � s. e.,:�k ; �• � rf i.�.C(1 f 1r �1��^F�llrl.�, �Sa � F'� �T y. �4�'Ii ,� t':.: ��,���Y'�.Y +v`���YII �•'i i. a A� �'•"}� }� � � .J+'. ,, > J4 '�► £ 4f l� i �• �.: yT, ( �1y "1 S V 1.1. 'r+,;'ZY ; 7^. ,�"d'' ��k� i t�•��' � ^' f / ?� �;� � �r�t r-�14 c'i�� � 1 < ,� M tp. 4.+ S'i Z `l y �(tx•' .,. ` /.. .f H 1 y� � n S' ^fs n i �;1 z x �,S� .!`! .. I� `i� ,a �t ;'r '�Y�• �'t rt `>� '�fj � s ` hss;' S'iL'l"� �.1 7? r*Y`✓'? �n, ;c i ,�rkV �� � .i (G i cs.�,, �r 1'�F r1i�4tz.ry �.`��'�a}- � Ta„ .,i,: _r +',3 < �sF'. 3 'F•i:" �j.a) .,,..'Q U' `, �t 0}.. Ft:mt:47 4�� �vxy5 E sc� •�. Yr� r I .. �4fiF' �;l• r� ,�•`�„�^..r.���. _xvs�"-a4.`*?i�. +::. f .,s �3r'�+.�r kl:a`f�c. . � I 1 I IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • Petitioner • { Vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:CV-95-143 (Judge Caldwell) (Magistrate Judge Blewitt) 1 EDWIN M. KOSIK, Respondent _. HI.-ED 5 HARRISBURG, PA ORDER ' A 0 ' r 1995 THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS: MARY a. pp4NDREA. CLERK Per LI 1e=:. / 1 " Alfonso Pew has filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus against Edwin M, Kosik, a judge of this court. I � Petitioner also seeks in forma pauperis status. Pursuant to our ( i authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) , we will dismiss the petition h without service of process. ' 2 Pew alleges that Judge Kosik has been assigned three of Pew's civil actions and that the Judge has denied Pew appointment 1 i of counsel in each of them. Pew seeks an order requiring Judge }. Kosik to appoint counsel. i There appear to be two possible bases of our ' r Y I jurisdiction. First, under 28 U.S.C. § 1361, district courts have i 1 mandamus jurisdiction "to compel any officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the ;) plaintiff. " However, we cannot grant relief under t a�s0 4ion ' �;;;ect tfom ttte ' 7 because it does not apply to members of mne 'judici r , ee'IS t' _ Q2•%:. . EXHIBIT D2 ~ „,'i . 7 ;�(,4�A. • > 72A Per. De LAY ay. F1/821 C t 0 1 cums ,Pe; a: Seltzer v. Foley, 502 F. Supp. 600, 602 n.2 (S.D.N.Y. 1980) . See also In re Fidelity Mortgacxe Investors, 690 F.2d 35, 39 (2d Cir. 1982) (citing Seltzer in reaching the same conclusion about a similarly worded statutory provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) ) . Second, under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, district courts have mandamus jurisdiction to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law." We cannot grant relief under this section either. As recently stated by the Third Circuit, the writ must be issued in aid of the exercise of the court's jurisdiction and "the means selected must be analogous to a common law writ." See Jones v. Lilly, 37 F.2d 964, 967 (3d Cir. 1994) . In the •instant case, issuance of the writ would not aid our jurisdiction because we have no matters pending involving the petitioner. There also does not appear to be an analogous common law writ. We are unaware of any writ that could be issued at common law by a judge that in -effect reverses an order of another judge of the same court who is handling the underlying litigation. Further, it is well established that a writ of mandamus may be issued only when the following conditions have been met: "(1) that the petitioner have no other adequate means to attain the desired relief, and (2) that he show a clear and indisputable 41 right to the relief sought." DeMasi Y. Weiss, 669 F.2d 114, 117 2 AO 72A ,n n,nm r -M t , a5 � ..vsrT 5' (3d Cir. 1982) . See also United States v. Santtini, 963 F.2d 585 (3d Cir. 1992) . While we will not address the second condition, we conclude that the petitioner cannot satisfy the first.1 The denial of a motion for appointment of counsel can be adequately reviewed on appeal after final judgment in the underlying cases. See Smith-Bev v. Petsock, 741 F.2d 22 (3d Cir. 1984) . Finally, acknowledging that the petitioner had sought review of his petition by the Chief Judge, we advise him that the outcome would have been no different if she had been assigned his petition since her status as the Chief Judge does not authorize her to oversee the judicial decisions of her colleagues. AND NOW, this 7th day of April, 1995, upon consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus and the motion for in forma pauperis status, it is ordered that: 1. The motion for in forma pauperis status F ` is granted. . 2. The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. 3. The Clerk of Court shall close this file. I 1. The first condition applies to both statutory sections. See d Santtini, supra (section 1651) ; Fallini v. Model, 783 F.2d 1343 (9th Cir. 1986) (section 1361) . 3 AO 72A _ (Rev. 8/82) "OA, " • ' . . •'•.'s, .o . . • ;• ; I I 7: 'KA;A I' A -4" -;f•.• ' . 4, •-• • . : - It is certified that any appeal from this order is frivolous, is not taken in good faith, and ia lacking in probable cause. Z-57 _1:16a/./triA ljr William W. Caldwell \ United States District Judge • • 4 • AO 72A (Rev.8/82) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT • FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA • ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • Plaintiff v. : CIVIL NO. 3:CV:3 "- -'"' — (Judge Kosik) DAVID S. MOYER, et al. , Defendants JUN - 7 1996 ORDER �r Background ` —" ppu p, Alfonso Percy Pew, an inmate at the State Li- , . _ Institution in Dallas, Pennsylvania, filed this civil rights action on April 23, 1996, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Along with his complaint, which includes attached exhibits, the plaintiff submitted an application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. S 1915. The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-- 134, 110 Stat. 1321 (April 26, 1996) (the "Act") , has changed substantially judicial treatment of civil rights actions by state and federal prisoners. For the reasons outlined below, the complaint will be dismissed, pursuant to § 804(a) (5) (subpara. (e) (2) (B) (ii) (to be codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2) (B) (ii) ) of the Act, and the motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted only for the purpose of filing the complaint. As a procedural rule, this new statutory provision may be applied to a case pending on the date of enactment. See generally Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 114 S. Ct. 1483 (1994) ; Scheidemann v. INS, No. EXHIBIT AO 72A D (Rev.(11 82) . • • 95-3241, 1996 WL 255928 (3d Cir. 1996) . The plaintiff names three (3) SCI-Camp Hill officials as defendants and describes them as follows: Mr. Imschweiler, Mailroom Supervisor; David S. Moyer, Grievance Officer for Business Office; and Kenneth S. Kyler, Superintendent. Liberally construing the complaint of this pro se litigant, e.q. , Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972) , he alleges as follows: On April 17, 1995 the plaintiff mailed a "pre-signed" money order for $100 to a business called Paladin Press in Boulder, Colorado as part of opening "a book purchasing account." Document 1 of the record, Exhibit A. Paladin Press refused the plaintiff's request and returned the money order with a letter dated "April 25, 1885 (sic] . " Id. at Exhibit C. That envelope from Paladin Press, which is postmarked April 26, 1995 and which came through the regular mail, presumably arrived at SCI-Camp Hill a few days or a week later. Id. at Exhibit B. The receipt of the money order--certifying that the money was deposited in the plaintiff's account--is dated May 25, 1995. Id.. at Exhibit D. The receipt was prepared by defendant Imschweiler. The plaintiff did not know that his money order had been returned until he received the receipt. The pertinent Department of Corrections rule about "inmate accounting" states in part: "You , may receive and disburse money from your individual account subject to the following: 1. A receipt will be furnished to each inmate for monies received from visitors or via mail (money 2 • AO 72A (Rev. 11!H21 • orders, certified checks, etc. ) ." On May 25, 1995, after he received the receipt, the plaintiff filed a grievance alleging that his money order was stolen here as it was received (as al cash transaction B35149. Please Note: This certified payment of [$]100.00 is signed over on back to a business. Therefore this institution does not have power of attorney over payment (of] funds signed to a 3rd party. . . I am requesting [that] my money be sent out to business. Id. at Exhibit E (brackets added) . Contrary to the plaintiff's characterization of the receipt, it shows that a "mail order" not "cash" was received. Id. at Exhibit D. In regard to the involvement of defendants Moyer and Kyler in the alleged mishandling of the money order, the plaintiff avers that they "continue to deny Plaintiff a postdeprivation remedy hearing for the assessment of his funds . . . ." Document 1 of the record,-p. 3. There is another incident about which the plaintiff complains. Defendant Moyer, on June 30, 1995, returned to the plaintiff his request for copies of his inmate trust fund account without taking any action. Apparently, the plaintiff asked for some action in addition to being provided with copies of his account. After the plaintiff protested the fact that his request was not honored, Moyer responded, on July 14, 1995, to the plaintiff's grievance and stated, inter alia: On June 30, 1995 your request to the Business Office was returned to you unprocessed as the forma pauperis form submitted with your request 3 AO 7. 2A • (Rev.8182) did not require any action by the Business Office. Nevertheless, a copy of your account should have been returned to you as requested. Attached are the two copies of your account as requested by you. Document 1 of the record, Exhibit H. In summary, the plaintiff alleges that some or all of the • defendants confiscated or stole his monies and unlawfully failed to provide him with copies of his inmate trust fund account. He avers in conclusory fashion that these actions were unlawful at least because they purportedly were taken in retaliation for the plaintiff's "exercising his rights to grievances and filing Civil Actions. " Document 1 of the .record, p. 3. j Discussion A provision of the Act that amends the in forma pauperis statute mandates dismissal of a federal civil action if "the court I determines that (A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or (B) the action or appeal (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted . . . . " § 804(a) (5) (emphasis added) . Accordingly, the Act provides this new ground for summary dismissal of a complaint--failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b) (6) . In Rule 12 (b) (6) analysis, the court must accept the veracity of a plaintiff's factual allegations. Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974) ; White v. Napoleon, 897 F.2d. 103, 106 (3d Cir. 1990) . "The test for reviewing a 12(b) (6) motion is whether under any reasonable reading of the pleadings, 4 plaintiff may be entitled to relief." Simon v. Cebrick, 53 F. 3d 4 A0 72A (Rev 8W-?) ■ 17, 19 (3rd Cir. 1995) . A court is " 'not required to accept legal conclusions either alleged or inferred from the pleaded facts. '" Kost v. Kozakiewicz, 1 F.3d 176, 183 (3d Cir. 1993) (quoting Mescall v. Burrus, 603 F.2d 1266, 1269 (7th Cir. 1979) ) . A plaintiff, in order to state a viable Section 1983 claim, must allege that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under color of state law and that said conduct deprived the plaintiff of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or by other laws of the United States. E.g. , Cohen v. City of Philadelphia, 736 F.2d 81, 83 (3d Cir.) , pert. denied, 469 U.S. 1019 (1984) . A prerequisite for a viable civil - . rights claim is that a defendant directed, or knew of and acquiesced in, the deprivation of a plaintiff's constitutional rights. E.g. , Konen v. Department of Social Serv. of the Citv. of N.Y. , 436 U.S. 658, 694-95 (1979) . The court must be concerned with whether there appears to have been any violation•of the United States Constitution rather than any "idea of how best to operate" a prison. pelt v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 539 (1979) . First, the court addresses the plaintiff's alleged due process violations--that some or all of the defendants confiscated or stole his monies and unlawfully failed to provide him with copies of his inmate trust fund account. He also claims that he was denied an adequate post-deprivation remedy. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution provides in pertinent part: "No State shall . . . deprive any person of life, 5 AO 72A (fiev. 8162) - • ) '':iii✓✓� liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . . " An intentional, unauthorized deprivation of an inmate's personal property does not violate the Constitution if there is an adequate post-deprivation remedy, e.g. , the opportunity to file a tort action in state court. Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 (1984) . However, an intentional deprivation of an inmate's property by a prison official pursuant to "established state procedure" may rise to the level of a constitutional deprivation regardless of any available state post-deprivation remedy. Conan v. Zimmerman Brush Co. , 455 U.S. 422, 436 {1982) . Applying these due process principles, it is emphasized that the plaintiff does not claim that his $100 was never deposited into his inmate account. He apparently argues that he should have received the money order directly instead of receiving a receipt of deposit. But, considering the prison rule for receipt of funds for an inmate from outside the prison, there is no indication that • the handling of the "pre-signed" money order was improper. The court cannot find that the plaintiff may have been deprived of his monies. He did not even know that the money order had been returned to him until the receipt was issued. The issue of a post-deprivation remedy is irrelevant here. Finally, Moyer's failure to promptly provide copies of the plaintiff's inmate trust fund account to him does not state a claim for violation of due process. Next, the court considers the plaintiff's claims of 6 ' 1.0.72A (Rev. 8182) • '. ' e! Y i7 i ,::hY%r retaliatory conduct. The First Amendment, which applies to actions by state as well as federal officials, prohibits, inter alia, "abridging the . . . right of the people . . . to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. " It is well-settled that an act committed in retaliation for exercise of a constitutionally protected right violates Section 1983 even if the act, when committed for a non-retaliatory reason, would have been proper. Mount Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 283-84 (1977) ; Peterkin v. Jeffes, 855 F.2d 1021, 1036 n.18 (3d Cir. 1988) ; Milhouse v. Carlson, 652 F.2d 371, 373-74 (3d Cir. 1981) . Referring to Milhouse, where the plaintiff claimed that he had been subjected to a series of disciplinary actions beginning just days after he had filed a civil rights suit against prison officials, the Peterkin court stated: "Where a prisoner . ' , alleged that he was retaliated against for filing a civil rights complaint against prison officials, we held that the right of access implicates the first amendment's petition clause." 855 F.2d at 1036 n. 18. However, "(c)laims of unconstitutional retaliation are particularly troublesome because they are fraught with the potential for abuse. " Blizzard v. Hastings, 886 F. Supp. 405, 409 (D.Del. 1995) . In order to state a claim for retaliation, conclusory allegations will not suffice and the complaint must "allege[) facts giving rise to a colorable suspicion of retaliation," e.q. , a series of events indicating ,;# retaliation. Flaherty v. Coughlin, 713 F.2d 10, 13 (2d Cir. ,$ 1983) . Accord Black v. Lane, 22 F. 3d 1395, 1399 (7th Cir. 1994) ; AO 72A ! (Rev. 8/82) • 1 • Abdul-Akbar v. Department of Corrections, 910 F. Supp. 986, 1000 (D.Del. 1995) ; Gualielmo v. Cunningham, 811 F. Supp. 31, 36-37 (D.N.H. 1993) . Turning to the case sub ludice, the plaintiff fails to allege a series of events suggesting any retaliation by Imschweiler or Kyler. Likewise, in regard to defendant Moyer's failure to promptly provide copies of the plaintiff's inmate trust fund account to him, the court finds that no retaliation claim has been stated. AND NOW, THEREFORE, THIS 7 45--DAY OF JUNE, 1996, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, S 804(a) (5) (subpara. (e) • - (2) (B) (ii) (to be codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2) (B) (ii) ) .(April 26, 1996) . - 2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma.,pauperis (Document 2 of the record) is granted only for the purpose of filing the complaint. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. EDWIN M. KOSIK United States District Judge EMK:ar j AO 72A (Rev. 8/82) - • FLLD UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT �N 2 0 1996 I FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANI iP R DEPUTY CL-!li ALFONSO PERCY PEW, """ " i°=r'•..:... Plaintiff : v. CIVIL NO. 3:CV-96-1084 W.S. WARD, et al. , (Judge Kosik) Defendants ORDER Background Alfonso Percy Pew, an inmate presently confined at the State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill, Pennsylvania (SCI;_ Camp Hill) , filed the above-captioned civil rights action pursuant i to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 14, 1996. Along with his complaint, j the plaintiff has submitted an application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. S 1915. The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (April 26, 1996) (the "Act") , has changed substantially judicial treatment of civil rights actions by state and federal prisoners. For the reasons outlined below, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to the Act, S 804 (d) (subpara. g) (to be codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) ) , 'and the motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted only for the purpose of filing the complaint. EXHIBIT AO 72A i E • (Rev.8182) - A provision of the Act bars a federal civil action by a prisoner moving to proceed in forma pauperis if he or she has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. § 804 (d) (subpara. g) . As a procedural or jurisdictional rule, this new provision may be applied to litigation pending on the date of the statutory enactment. See generally Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994) . The instant plaintiff, while incarcerated, previously initiated the following civil actions in either this court or the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, which were dismissed either as frivolous or fbr failure to state a claim upon which relief could have been granted (see Exhibits A-C) : Pew v. Cox, Civil No. 93-4128 (E.D. Pa. closed August 20, 1993) ; Pew v. Kosik, Civil No. 95-143 (M.D. Pa. closed April 7, 1995) ; and pew v. Moyer, et al. , Civil No. 96-714 (M.D. Pa. closed June 7, 1996) . There is no indication that this inmate is under "imminent danger of serious physical injury. " Plaintiff is housed in the Special Management Unit ("SMU") at SCI-Camp Hill. In the complaint, plaintiff sets forth numerous allegations wherein he claims his constitutional rights and the rights of other inmates in the SMU have been violated by Defendants. For example, plaintiff contends that inmates in the SMU are deprived 2 AO 72A • - (Rev.8/82) • f: ridSS'':• of magazines, books and adequate food trays, access to the law library, participation in vocational, psychological and treatment courses and personal hygienic items such as deodorant, lotion and hair grease. He further contends that he and the other SMU inmates are harassed by being subjected to searches, being denied special religious diets and being required to wear shackles when they go outside. While plaintiff complains of the use of mace and cell extraction procedures in the SMU by the prison staff, plaintiff generally asserts his overall objection to the use of these procedures and does not point to any specific occasions when he was subjected to these procedures. He does not claim that he is presently being subjected to any of these procedures or that he is in any way under imminent danger of serious physical harm. Thus, under the Act the instant complaint must be dismissed as meritless. AND NOW, THEREFORE, THIS 2.454 DAY OF JUNE, 1996, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is granted only for the purpose of filing this complaint. 2. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, d Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1 i 3 AO 72A (Rev.8182) • • „nRER S 804(d) (subpara. g) (to be codified at 28 U.S.C. S 1915(g) ) (April 26, 1996) . 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 4. Any appeal from this order will be deemed not taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. S 1915(a) . EDWIN M. KOSIK United States District Judge EMK:lq AO 72A (Rev.8/82) - • IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI, • a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • • Plaintiff, • v. • No. 12-1717 • PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF • CORRECTIONS, et al., • Defendants • Civil Action CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am depositing in the U.S. mail a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Revoke IFP to be served upon the following person(s) in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail addressed as follows: Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, BT-7263 SCI-Mahanoy 301 Morea Road Frackville, PA 17932 p e a Renee J. Ro rts Legal Assistant Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Phone No.• (717) 728-7763 Fax No.• (717) 728-0307 Date: February 27, 2014 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI, • a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • • Plaintiff, • ,- • =-n r • No. 12-1717 V. 4ytµ PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF • ,`: CORRECTIONS, et al., • Defendants • Civil Action PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY; Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendants in the above- captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, Office of General Counsel, Joseph '4 ginit'_/-4-li tant Counsel Attorney I►` o.: 208039 Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Phone No.• (717) 728-7763 Fax No.: (717) 728-0307 E-mail:josfulgini @pa.gov Date: February 27, 2014 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI, • a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, • Plaintiff, • v. : No. 12-1717 PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF : CORRECTIONS, et al., • Defendants : Civil Action CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am depositing in the U.S. mail a true and correct copy of the foregoing Entry of Appearance to be served upon the following person(s) in the manner indicated below. Service by first-class mail addressed as follows: Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, BT-7263 SCI-Mahanoy 301 Morea Road Frackville, PA 17932 Renee J. Roblerts Legal Assistant Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 Phone No.: (717) 728-7763 Fax No.: (717) 728-0307 Date: February 27, 2014 SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI alk/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, PLAINTIFF V. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, JEFFREY A. BEARD, ET AL. DEFENDANTS : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : 12-1717 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of March, 2014, upon consideration of 7.1m Defendants' Motion to Revoke Plaintiffs In Forma Pauperis Status and to Dismiss the Complaint, that motion is GRANTED pursuant to Section 6602(f) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 Pa. C.S. §6602(f). Plaintiff has had more than three previous prison conditions suits dismissed as frivolous and he has failed to make a credible allegation that he is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. Accordingly, his in forma pauperis status is REVOKED and the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice to his right to reinstitute the Complaint following his payment of the necessary filing fees. If he fails to pay the requisite fees within thirty (30) days of this order, this matter will be dismissed with prejudice. Defendants' Application to Stay Proceedings Pursuant to the Pending Motion to Revoke Plaintiff's In Forma Pauperis Status is DISMISSED as moot. By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J. 4. 12-1717 CIVIL TERM Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, Pro se, BT7263 Box A Bellefonte, PA 16823-0820 ./ Joseph G. Fulginiti, Esquire Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 sal Ronny R Anderson Sheriff Jody S Smith Chief Deputy Richard W Stewart Solicitor SHERIFF'S OFFICE OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY • •i �JFF•CW OF THE ilf.SRIFP 1. i4 "APR 14 ...VM2EfL' I U �VV11i�, PENNSYLVANIA Alfonso Percy Pew vs. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (et al.) Case Number 2012 -1717 SHERIFF'S RETURN OF SERVICE 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: H Clifford O'Hara, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Franklin Tennis, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns a iiF�wthin requested Complaint & Notice as Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Brian Thomoso_n , but was unable to locate the Defendant in the Sheriffs bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore deputizes the Sheriff of Schuylkill, Pennsylvania to serve the within Complaint & Notice according to law. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Lt. Barnes, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Officer Gilliam, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make Service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. vi exu.^aySu. s Shanff: Teleosof 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Officer Smith, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as "Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Office r Rider, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns t e within requested Complaint & Notice as "Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Officer Taylor, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as "Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Major Morris, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns a wi )n requested Complaint & Notice as "Not Served" at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechaicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant; 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: rylarirosa Lamas, but was unable to locate the Defendant in the Sheriffs bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore deputizes the Sheriff of Centre, Pennsylvania to serve the within Complaint & Notice according to law. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Ms. Grove, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as "Not Served" at C. Graw - Business office, 1920 Technology Parkway, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. Deputy William Cline spoke with the legal department of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, they were unable to tell this office where this defendant works to allow us to make service and they would not accept service for this defendant. More information regarding this defendant is needed, i.e. specific prison defendant is employed at or more specific name for defendant. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Kurt Granland, but was unable to locate the Defendant in the Sheriffs bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore deputizes the-Sheriff of Huntingdon, Pennsylvania to serve the within Complaint & Notice according to law. 02/18/2014 Sheriff Ronny R Anderson, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Lt. Kensinger, but was unable to locate the Defendant in the Sheriffs bailiwick. The Sheriff therefore deputizes the Sheriff of Centre, Pennsylvania to serve the within Complaint & Notice according to law. 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for _ at 1920 Technology Paj way, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. �fLIA V W L L Y (c) CountySui:o Sheriff, Tefeosofi Inc, 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for Jeffery A. Beard at 1920 Technolog Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. --41+A CLINE, DEPUTY 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for Dorina Varner at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. A Y CLINE, DEPUTY 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for James Barn cle at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Mechanicsburg, PA 17050. / V11111111..' (K/ 'R CLINE, DEPUTY 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for John E. Wetzel at PA Department of Corrections, 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, ec1GI hanic burg, PA 17050. ,W'L AM CL NE, DEPUTY 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for Shirley Smeal-Moore 1920 TECHNOLOGY PARKWAY, HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP, MECHANICSBURG, PA,17050. CLINE, DEPUTY 02/18/2014 02:29 PM - Deputy William Cline, being duly sworn according to law, served the requested Complaint & Notice by handing a true copy to a person representing themselves to be Stacy Sentz, paralegal, who accepted as "Adult Person in Charge" for Pennsylvania Department of Corrections at 1920 Technology Parkway, Hampden Township, Camp Hill, PA 17011. LIAM CLINE, DEPUTY 02/24/2014 10:30 AM - The requested Complaint & Notice served by the Sheriff of Centre County upon Jeff Rockovan, who accepted for Marirosa Lamas, at SCI Rockview, Route 26, Bellefonte, PA 16823. Denny Nau, Sheriff, Return of Service att`a`che3 fo and made part of the within record. 02/24/2014 10:30 AM - The requested Complaint & Notice served by the Sheriff of Centre County upon Jeffrey Rackovan, who accepted for Lt. Kensinger, at SCI Rockview, Route 26, Bellefonte, PA 16823. Denny Nau, Sheriff, Return of Service attached to and made part of the within record. 03/11/2014 08:40 AM - The requested Complaint & Notice served by the Sheriff of Huntingdon County upon Connie Green, Superintendent's Assistant, who accepted for Kurt_Granland, at SCI Huntingdon, 1100 Pike Street, Huntingdon, PA 16654. William G. Walters, Sheriff, Return of Service attached to and made part of the within record. (c) ^euntySuite Shur tf, Tek osef`. lec. 04/07/2014 The Sheriff of Schuylkill County, being duly sworn according to law, states he made diligent search and inquiry for the within named Defendant to wit: Brian Thompson, but was unable to locate the Defendant in his bailiwick. The Schuylkill County Sheriff therefore returns the within requested Complaint & Notice as "Not Served" at SCI Frackville, 1111 Altamont Blvd., Frackville, PA 17931. SCI Frackville refused service stated defendant never employed at that this location and the Complaint has expired as of this date. SO ANSWERS, April 07, 2014 RONNY R ANDERSON, SHERIFF (c) CountySuite Sheriff, Teleosoft. Inc. SHERIFF'S OFFICE CENTRE COUNTY Rm 101 Court House, Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, 16823 (814) 355 -6803 SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, AND AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN 1, Plaintiff(s) Alfonso Percy Pew a /k/a Sehu- Kessa -Saa Tabansi INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS: You must file one instruction sheet for each defendant. please type or print legibly. Do Not detach any copies. 2. Case Number 2012 -1717 3. Defendant(s) Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Jeffrey A Beard, ET AL. 4. Type of Writ or Complaint: Complaint 513963 SERVE AT 5. Name of Individual. Comoanv, Corporation, Etc„ to Serve or Description of Property to be Levied, Attached or Sold. Lt. Kensinger 6. Address (Street or RFD, Apartment No., City, Boro, Twp., State and Zip Code) SCI Rockview Route 26, Bellefonte, PA 16823 7. Indicate unusual service: n Reg Mail n Certified Mail n Deputize 1". Post n Other Now, 20 . i SHERIFF OF CENTRE COUNTY, PA., do hereby deputize the Sheriff of County to execute this Writ and make return thereof according to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. Sheriff of Centre County 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sheriff levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, after notifying person of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof. 9. PrintfTvpe Name and Address of Attorney /Originator 10. Telephone Number 11. Date 12. Signature SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF SHERJFF ONLY »0 OT WRITE BELOW TJIIS LINE 13. f acknowledge receipt of the writ 1 SIGNATURE of Authorized CCSD Deputy of Clerk and Title or complamras indicated above. i 14. Date Filed 15. Expiration/Hearing Date TO BE COMPLETED BY SH RIFF 16. Served and made known to 2014 10:30 AM 20 , at JEFFREY RACKOVAN , on the PA 24 day of February SCI Rockview Route 26, Bellefonte, o'clock, m., at 16823 , County of Centre Comm. wealth of ilu Defendant(s) Li Adult ili Adult Pennsylvania, in the manner described below: personally served. family member with whom said Defendant(s) resides(s). in charge of Defendant's residence. /Clerk of place of lodging in which Defendant(s) resides(s). or person in charge of Defendant's office or usual place and officer Relationship is of business. of said Defendant ASSIT TO SUPT company. NO Manager • Agent Other On the . day of , 20 , at o'clock, . M. Defendant not found because: n • Moved Fl Unknown n No Answer Q Vacant Ti Remarks: Other Advance Costs 0.00 Docket 9.00 Service 15.00 Sur Charge 0.00 Affidavit 3.50 Mileage 10.00 Postage Misc. Total Costs 37.50 Costs Due or Refund 37.50 17. AFFIRMED an. su' -cribed to before me this 20. day of Al,....- - ; , ..i 20 , So Answer. �-/ 18. Signatu of Dep. Sheri 19. `Da�te� �' �t l i5 i 21. Signature of S e iff 22. Date [DESRA C. IM 41"'" , ' rothonotary Div'Isidn Of Common Pleas My C milko ftfaxstritlintr®. County, PA SHERIFF OF CENTRE COUNTY Amount Pd. Page 24. 1 K t eIn Rhfet t teF'S RETURN SIGNATURE 25. Date Received __SHERIFF'S OFFICE . CENTRE COUNTY ,-Rfn 101 Court.House, Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, 16823 (814) 355-6803 SHERIFF SERVICE PROCESS RECEIPT, AND AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS: You must file one instruction sheet for each defendant. please type or print legibly. Do Not detach any copies. 1. Plaintiff(s) Alfonso Percy Pew a/k/a Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi 2. Case Number 2012-1717 3. Defendant Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Jeffrey A Beard, ET AL. 4. Type of Writ or Complaint: Complaint 513963 SERVE AT { 5. Name of Individual. Company, Corporation. Etc., to Serve or Description of Property to be Levied, Attached or Sold. Marirosa Lamas 6. Address (Street or RFD, Apartment No., City, Boro, Two., State and Zip Code) SCI Rockview Route 26, Bellefonte, PA 16823 7. Indicate unusual service: 7. Reg Mail ET " Certified Mail Ea: Deputize 0:: Post Other Now. 20 . 1 SHERIFF OF CENTRE COUNTY, PA., do hereby deputize the Sheriff of County to execute this Writ and make return thereof according to law. This deputation being made at the request and risk of the plaintiff. Shenff of Centre County 8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSSST IN EXPEDITING SERVICE NOTE ONLY APPLICABLE ON WRIT OF EXECUTION: N.B. WAIVER OF WATCHMAN - Any deputy sherilf levying upon or attaching any property under within writ may leave same without a watchman, in custody of whomever is found in possession, alter notifying pe son of levy or attachment, without liability on the part of such deputy or the sheriff to any plaintiff herein for any loss, destruction or removal of any such property before sheriff's sale thereof. 9. Print/Type Name and Address of Attrney/Oriqnator 10. Telephone Numb . Oate 12. Signature SPACE BELOW FOR USE OF 5HERIFf ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOWT(IIS LINE 13. loacelpiacit rligeligiVdthat07,4t 1 . SIGNATURE of Authorized CCSD Deputy of Clerk and Title 14. Date Filed 15. Expiration/Hearing Date TO BE CoMPLETD BY SHRIFF JEFF ROCKOVAN 24 February 16. Served and made known to , on the day ot , 20 2014 . at 10:30 AM o'clock, m., at SCI Rockview Route 26, Bellefonte, PA 16823 , County of Centre ConaIth of Pennsylvania, in the manner described below: Defendant(s) personally served, ASSIST TO SUPT Adult family member with whom said Defendant(s) resides(s). Relationship is Adult in charge of Defendant's residence. 17 Manager/Clerk of place of lodging in which Defendant(s) resides(s). E Agent or person in charge of Defendant's office or usual place of business. and officer of said Defendant company. Other On the . day of , 20 , at o'clock, M. _ Defendant not found because: M ' Moved 7 Unknown El No Answer 7 Vacant r-i Other . Remarks: Advance Costs 0.00 Docket 9.00 Service 15.00 Sur Charge 0.00 Affidavit 3.50 MDoaqe 10.00 Postage Misc. Total Costs 37.50 Costs ue or Refund 37.50 17. AFFIRMED and s bscribed o before me this 6;4/' So Answer. 8. Sig ture ot Dep entf - r 19. Date 01/9 17-Ce ty 20. day o A vapor 20././ r23. ,„- Ntary V% .,* / .P•Atir.iddia, 0 • ubac 21. Signature!o Sheriff 22. Date SHERIFF OF CENTRE COUNTY DEBRA Amount Pd. Page C. I f L., Prothonotary My Com issicRitapilarli of Common pet - 24. I ACK owaougitifimmivil As R URN SIGNATURE OF A HGRIZSIO..AUTH , nay ,,,orniniSsion Ernirsta: ... 25. Date Received Alfonso Percey Pew SHERIFF'S OFFICE HUNTINGDON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. Kurt Granlund SCI - Huntingdon 1100 Pike Street Huntingdon, PA 16654 241 Mifflin Street Huntingdon, PA 16652 Telephone: 814- 643 -0880 William G. Walters, Sheriff No. 1717 Term: 2012 Now, this 24th day of February , 2014 , at 0840 HOURS I served the within upon at Civil Action - Notice and Complaint Kurt Granlund SCI - Huntingdon, 1100 Pike Street, Huntingdon, PA 16654 by handing to Connie Green, Superintendent's Assistant one true and correct copy /copies of the within Civil Action - Notice and Complaint the contents- thereof. Sworn and subscr'bed to before me this 1_t day of � A Cr 20 ICI , A.D. ro un ...e ota '.a.. COMMONWEAL NOT N. SEAL Tammy S. Foor, Notary Public Huntingon Boro, Huntingdon County My commission ex ires October 26, 2014 and made known to Connie Green So Answers, William G. Walters, Sheriff Deputy Nicole A. Lippmann Chief Deputy /Deputy Costs: Rec. & Doc. $9.00 Service $9.00 Mileage /Postage $4.00 Surcharge Affidavit $5.00 Miscellaneous Total Costs $27.00 Indigent Mon Mar 3, 2014 10:26AM PAGE: 1 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OF SCHUYLKILL COUNTY SCHUYLKILL COUNTY COURT HOUSE POTTSVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17901 (570) 622 -5570 PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT: PEOPLE: * * A F F I D A V I T O F R E T U R N PEW,ALFANSO PERCY V S THOMPSON,BRIAN * * DEPUTIZED FROM CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT NUMBER FILED BY TYPE OF PAPER SERVING NUMBER PRO FILE DATE EXPIRATION SHF RECEIVED . DEP RETURNED . : 2012 -1717 : CUMBERLAND COUNTY SHERIFF : CIVIL ACTION : 75863 02/12/2014 03/14/2014 02/19/2014 03/03/2014 NAME Service for THOMPSON,BRIAN SEQ DATE TIME SERVED TO ( P E O P L E T O B E ADDRESS 1 C/O SCI FRACKVILLE ADDRESS 2 S E R V E D) 1111 ALTMONT BLVD ( A T T E M P T S A T ADDRESS 1 1 02/26/2014 10:30 [NOT FOUND] SCI FRACKVILLE * REMARKS : SCI FRACKVILLE REFUSED SERVICE NEVER * REMARKS : EMPLOYED AT SCI CITY ST ZIP DEPUTY FRACKVILLE PA S E R V I C E ) ADDRESS 2 CITY DRIES, C ST ZIP FEE FRACKVILLE PA 17931 40 Total : COST 22.40 22.40 Total Fee Charge for all Services : 22.40 Mon Mar 3, 2014 10:26AM SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OF SCHUYLKILL COUNTY SCHUYLKILL COUNTY COURT HOUSE POTTSVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17901 (570) 622 -5570 * * A F F I D A V I T O F R E T U R N PAGE: 2 I hereby CERTIFY and RETURN a NOT FOUND because unable to locate the individual, company, corporation, etc, named above. SWORN and subscribed before me this SO ANSWERS day of r (Deputy Sheriff) (Prothonotary) Y/ riff of Schuylkill ounty) End - of - Return (X -52 -2014) 44 SEHU-KESSA-SAA TABANSI a/k/a ALFONSO PERCY PEW, PLAINTIFF V. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT' ^� ==` OF CORRECTIONS, mrn JEFFREY A. BEARD, ET AL. c ri__ DEFENDANTS : 12-1717 CIVIL TERM --(n(r- , IN RE: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT i;.""' Masland, J., August 1, 2014:-- n ry Before the court is a filing entitled "Notice Nunc Pro Tunc Re-Instateme it cH Timely Filed Appeal Due to Fraud" filed by Plaintiff, Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, that has been forwarded to us by the Chief Clerk of the Commonwealth Court for processing as we deem appropriate. Plaintiff's filing also includes an "Affidavit of Imminent Danger." Plaintiff is an inmatein a State Correctional Institution and is representing himself. Throughout this litigation, we have endeavored (not always successfully) to decipher Plaintiff's various filings and will proceed to do so here in good faith. In this case, we recently revoked Plaintiff's In Forma Pauperis (IFP) status and dismissed his Complaint. Pursuant to Section 6602(f) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), the court can revoke a prisoner's IFP status if the prisoner has filed three or more civil actions involving prison conditions and these civil actions were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim. Section 6602(f) states: If the prisoner has previously filed prison conditions litigation and: three or more of these prior civil actions have been dismissed pursuant to subsection (e)(2) ... • 12-1717 CIVIL TERM the court may dismiss the action. The court shall not, however, dismiss a request for preliminary injunctive relief or a temporary restraining order which makes a credible allegation that the prisoner is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6602(f). Subsection (e)2 allows the court to dismiss prison conditions litigation when the case "is frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or the defendant is entitled to assert a valid affirmative defense, including immunity, which, if asserted, would preclude the relief." 42 Pa. C.S. § 6602(e)(2). Plaintiffs status as a serial abusive prison litigator has long since been established. See Pew v. Mechling, 929 A.2d 1214 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) ("The record shows that Pew has filed seven other civil actions which have been dismissed for being frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted."). Accordingly, he can only maintain IFP status if he makes "a credible allegation that [he] is in imminent danger of serious bodily injury." 42 Pa. C.S. § 6602(f). In his Affidavit of Imminent Danger, Plaintiff alleges numerous purported abuses by the Department of Corrections that put him in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. However, mere bald allegations, unsupported by any other evidence, are insufficient to carry Plaintiff's burden of making a credible allegation. Our Commonwealth Court has held that "to satisfy the 'credible allegation' requirement of the PLRA, it [is] imperative that [the prisoner] substantiate his averments with some form of evidence extrinsic to the complaint itself, such as medical documentation." Brown v. Pa. Dept. of Corrections, 58 A.3d 118, 123 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012). Plaintiff's filing is devoid of any such extrinsic evidence to corroborate his allegation of imminent danger. That, coupled with his status as a serial abusive litigant -2- 12-1717 CIVIL TERM leads the court to find his allegation of imminent danger to be not credible. Accordingly, his IFP status will remain revoked without prejudice to his right to proceed with this litigation upon the payment of the appropriate filing fees. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this /"'day of August, 2014, upon consideration of the filing entitled "Notice Nunc Pro Tunc Re -Instatement of Timely Filed Appeal Due to Fraud", that filing is DENIED in all respects. +� Sehu-Kessa-Saa Tabansi a/k/a Alfonso Percy Pew, Pro se, BT7263 SCI Mahanoy 301 Morea Road Frackville, PA 17932 Joseph Fulginiti, Esquire Pennsylvania Department of Corrections 1920 Technology Parkway Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 sal -3- By the Court, Albert H. Masland, J.