Roderick Maurice White v. Mr. Staten
672 F. App'x 919
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- Roderick White, a Georgia state prisoner, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming Sergeant Geary Staten used excessive force on Feb. 21, 2014 (baton strikes and pepper spray) at Valdosta State Prison.
- White alleges he filed a grievance about the incident with Officer Rolando Gonzalez on Feb. 27, 2014; he says Gonzalez did not give a receipt or process the grievance.
- Valdosta follows the Georgia DOC SOP: a two-step grievance process (original grievance to counselor, then central office appeal) but grievances alleging sexual assault or physical force are automatically forwarded to Internal Investigations and the grievance process terminates (no appeal avenue).
- Staten moved to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and submitted evidence showing no prison record of a grievance; Gonzalez affidavit denied receiving an excessive-force grievance from White.
- The magistrate judge recommended dismissal for failure to exhaust; the district court adopted that recommendation. The court of appeals vacated and remanded, concluding the district court failed to resolve a key factual dispute and should hold an evidentiary hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether White exhausted available administrative remedies under the SOP for an excessive-force grievance | White says he timely submitted a grievance to Gonzalez on Feb. 27 alleging excessive force, which (under the SOP) would automatically terminate the grievance process and thus exhaust remedies | Staten and Gonzalez say prison records show no such grievance and Gonzalez avers he never received it; defendants argue White thus failed to exhaust (including by not filing a central-office appeal) | The court held exhaustion depends on the disputed factual question whether White actually submitted the Feb. 27 grievance; if he did, SOP exhausted his remedies because excessive-force grievances are automatically forwarded and require no appeal; remand for factual resolution and an evidentiary hearing was required |
| Whether the district court properly resolved factual disputes on exhaustion without an evidentiary hearing | White argued the court should credit his statements and letters and hold a hearing before dismissing | Defendants relied on documentary records and Gonzalez’s affidavit to support dismissal without a hearing | The court held the district court erred by failing to resolve the factual dispute and directed an evidentiary hearing on remand (or factual findings) before dismissing for non-exhaustion |
| Whether a prisoner must refile or seek leave to refile when prison officials fail to process a properly submitted grievance | White argued he should not be required to resubmit when prison officials failed to process an originally filed grievance | Defendants argued exhaustion requires pursuing available steps (e.g., refiling/out-of-time filings or appeals) | The court ruled a prisoner need not craft new procedures (such as seeking leave to refile) when prison officials prevent processing a properly filed grievance (citing Turner) |
| Whether a central-office appeal was required for an excessive-force grievance under the SOP | White argued no appeal was required because the SOP treats excessive-force grievances as automatically forwarded to Internal Investigations, terminating the grievance process | Defendants argued the two-step process always applied and White failed to complete it | The court held that under the SOP at issue, an excessive-force grievance is automatically forwarded and no further appeal is available or required, so a central-office appeal was not necessary to exhaust |
Key Cases Cited
- Turner v. Burnside, 541 F.3d 1077 (11th Cir. 2008) (two-step procedure for resolving PLRA exhaustion disputes and guidance that courts should not require inmates to seek leave to refile when officials destroyed or refused to process a properly filed grievance)
- Whatley v. Warden, Ware State Prison, 802 F.3d 1205 (11th Cir. 2015) (clarifies Turner and exhaustion factfinding procedures on appeal)
- Bryant v. Rich, 530 F.3d 1368 (11th Cir. 2008) (review standard for factual findings on PLRA exhaustion and note on evidentiary hearings)
- Johnson v. Meadows, 418 F.3d 1152 (11th Cir. 2005) (prisoner must exhaust available administrative remedies provided by the state before filing § 1983 suit)
- Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (2002) (PLRA exhaustion requirement applies to claims of excessive force)