United States District Court, D. Kansas
MYOUN L. SAWYER, Plaintiff,
LAURA HOWARD, et al., Defendants.
Crow, U.S. District Senior Judge
prior order, this court screened plaintiff's complaint
and directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint or show
cause why plaintiff's complaint should not be dismissed
for failure to state a claim. Doc. No. 3. Plaintiff, who is
proceeding pro se, filed an amended complaint and a
supplement. Doc. Nos. 4 and 5. This case is before the court
to screen plaintiff's amended complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A. The court shall apply the standards the
court summarized in the previous screening order. Doc. No. 3,
The amended complaint and supplement
amended complaint is written on forms for bringing an action
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff's claims arise
from his treatment at Larned State Hospital
(“LSH”) within the Sexual Predator Treatment
Program (“SPTP”). Plaintiff was placed in the
SPTP on August 19, 2011. Later he served a criminal sentence
in the custody of the Kansas Department of Corrections. He
was returned to the SPTP at LSH on October 4, 2017.
names the following persons as defendants: Laura Howard,
Secretary of the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability
Services; Lesia Dipman, Superintendent of LSH; Marcus
Herrera, Program Director of the SPTP at LSH; Haleigh
Bennett, Program Manager of the SPTP at LSH; Marc Quillen,
Clinical Director of the SPTP at LSH; Michael Burke, Chief
Medical Officer at LSH; David Barnum, Clinical Director at
LSH; Keri Applequist, Assistant Clinical Director of the SPTP
at LSH; Holly E. Hertel, Registered Nurse at LSH; Tomas
Garza, a doctor at LSH; Seth Osborn, a therapist at LSH;
Jason Fisher, Chief of Security at LSH; Lucille
Partlowloyall, a social worker specialist for the SPTP at
LSH; and Erica Brown, a registered nurse at LSH.
Count I, plaintiff alleges a “[m]assive conspiracy of
mistreatment, discrimination and punitive conditions”
and the use of “exaggerated rational[e] to justify the
use of” physical restraint and seclusion in violation
of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution
and state laws and regulations. Doc. No. 4, p. 6. This
appears to be a claim that plaintiff's substantive due
process rights have been denied or that his equal protection
rights have been denied.
alleges that he has been on continuous Individualized Person
Management Plan (“IPMP”) since February 24, 2019.
The IPMP provides for confinement in plaintiff's room for
all but one hour a day at “Stage 1” and, with
good behavior, progress to “Stage 2” which
permits 2 hours outside plaintiff's cell. Doc. No. 4-1,
p. 21. In Count II, plaintiff alleges “[d]iscriminatory
orders” written by a doctor and chief medical officer
and deliberate indifference toward a serious medical need, in
violation of the Constitution and state laws and regulations.
In Count III, plaintiff alleges that he was the victim of
battery on two separate occasions by unidentified staff
supplement to the amended complaint alleges that defendants
have violated plaintiff's right to free exercise of his
religion by restricting his attendance and participation in
religious worship services because plaintiff
“fellowships and studies” with the Jehovah's
Witnesses. The supplement also alleges retaliation.
exhibits to plaintiff's amended complaint show as the
“Rationale for IPMP request, ” that on February
24, 2019, plaintiff was reported to have yelled, cursed and
sexually threatened staff. He refused to allow a nurse to
close a medication window while cursing and yelling. He was
also reported to have exposed himself to staff multiple
times. Doc. No. 4-1, p. 19.
policy and procedure provide that “An IPMP can be used
when a person demonstrates or threatens substantial injury to
others and routine psychiatric methods have been ineffective
or are unlikely to be effective in reducing such risk.”
Id. at p. 4.
IPMP reviewed plaintiff's “lengthy history of
assaultive behaviors, ” his aggressive posturing toward
staff, verbal threats, violent acts, public masturbation,
propositioning staff, and throwing feces and urine.
Id. at 19-20.
IPMP indicated that medication, verbal de-escalation,
individual therapy, physical exercise, peer support, mental
health education and security assistance had been utilized to
better control plaintiff's misbehavior. Id. at
IPMP stated that there were two initial stages. Id.
at p. 21. Stage 1 limited plaintiff to his room except for a
one hour break for shower, phone calls and exercise with no
peers present. Stage 2 permitted a two hour break from
confinement in his room. Plaintiff could reach Stage 2 ...