United States District Court, D. Hawaii
ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO
Michael Seabright, Chief United States District Judge
the court is pro se Plaintiff Ian Dennison's first
amended prisoner civil rights Complaint (“FAC”).
Dennison names Waiawa Correctional Facility
(“WCF”) Warden Scott Harrington, and WCF
correctional officers Lieutenant Anthony Monteilh and
Armitage (collectively, “Defendants”) in their
individual capacities. He alleges Defendants violated his
rights to due process and equal protection regarding
disciplinary proceedings that occurred in December 2015.
following reasons, the FAC is DISMISSED for failure to state
a cognizable claim for relief. See 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2) & 1915A(b). Dennison is granted
leave to amend to correct the deficiencies discussed below,
on or before November 28, 2016.
11, 2016, Dennison commenced this action by filing the
original Complaint and an informal request to proceed in
forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF Nos. 1 and 2.
Dennison claimed that Defendants denied him due process and
equal protection under the law when they falsely charged him
with being intoxicated at WCF, denied his request to
introduce evidence at his disciplinary proceedings, found him
guilty, transferred him to the Halawa Correctional Facility
(“HCF”), denied his grievance appeal, and
increased his classification status. He alleged these acts
resulted in the Hawaii Paroling Authority's
(“HPA”) decision to deny him parole in January
2016 and impose additional conditions for early release.
August 2, 2016, the court granted Dennison's amended IFP
application. See ECF Nos. 5 and 6.
August 16, 2016, the court dismissed the original Complaint
with leave to amend, for Dennison's failure to state a
claim. Order, ECF No. 7. Specifically, Dennison's claims
against WCF and his damages claims asserted against
Harrington, Monteilh, and Armitage in their official
capacities were dismissed with prejudice. Dennison's due
process and equal protection claims were dismissed without
prejudice, with explicit notice of their legal deficiencies.
See Order, ECF No. 7. Dennison was granted until September
16, 2016, to file an amended complaint.
September 19, 2016, Dennison filed the FAC presently before
the court on screening. ECF No. 8. The FAC's allegations
are substantially similar to those in the original Complaint,
although it provides more detail and Dennison attaches
several exhibits to the FAC to support his claims. Dennison
realleges due process and equal protection claims against
Harrington, Monteilh, and Armitage in their individual
Allegations in the FAC
November 18, 2015, Officer Armitage and several other
unidentified officers encountered Dennison and inmate Nowicke
in WCF building 9B E. Armitage suspected Dennison was
intoxicated because his eyes were red and glassy, his speech
was slurred, and he was unsteady. See FAC, ECF No.
8, PageID #72. Armitage instructed Dennison to pack his
belongings and go to the medical unit where medical staff
questioned him. Dennison provided a urine sample, that he
asserts tested negative for drugs. Dennison was then placed
in segregation at WCF.
November 19, 2015, Dennison was transferred to the HCF
administrative segregation unit to await a disciplinary
November 20, 2015, Dennison received a Notice of Report of
Misconduct and Hearing, that charged him with violation of
DPS Policy and Procedure COR13.03 4.0.3 a.7(9), which
Possession, introduction, manufacturing or use of any
narcotic paraphernalia, drugs, intoxicants, synthetic drug
composition or alcoholic beverages not prescribed for the
individual by the medical staff, which includes any form of
Monteilh investigated these charges.
December 10, 2015, Monteilh chaired Dennison's
disciplinary hearing. At the hearing, three officers
testified that Dennison had appeared intoxicated on November
18, 2016, because (1) his eyes were red and glassy; (2) he
was shaking, unsteady, confused, and dazed; and (3) his
speech was slurred. Monteilh denied Dennison's request to
introduce his medical records. Dennison alleges these records
would have shown that he had been treated several times
before the incident for irritated, red eyes (due to
allergies) at HCF and WCF, thus, explaining why his eyes were
December 17, 2015, Monteilh found Dennison guilty and
sanctioned him to thirty-days on “lockdown.” FAC,
ECF No. 8, PageID #71. Dennison was credited with his
twenty-two days in administrative segregation and served the
remaining eight days in HCF Special Holding. He was released
from Special Holding on December 18, 2015.
February 3, 2016, Warden Harrington upheld Monteilh's
decision and denied Dennison's grievance appeal.
Id., PageID #75.
about February 8, 2016, the HPA denied Dennison parole based,
at least in part, on this misconduct. See id.,
PageID #80. The HPA recommended that Dennison participate in
all “recommended programs, i.e., work furlough and
etc., ” and scheduled another parole hearing for
January 2017. Id.
April 4, 2016, Dennison's third-step appeal was denied.
Id., PageID #78.
seeks expungement of the disciplinary report, damages, and a
new parole hearing.