895 F.3d 481
7th Cir.2018Background
- Maurice Wallace, serving life without parole for murder, has been in disciplinary segregation (solitary) for ~11 years after an assault on a guard.
- Wallace suffers from serious mental illness (including PTSD), takes medication, experiences hallucinations, panic, insomnia, and has a history of at least five suicide attempts (three while in segregation).
- He filed a pro se § 1983 complaint alleging prolonged isolation exacerbates his mental illness and increases his suicide risk, asserting Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims.
- Wallace sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP); the district court denied IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), finding he had three PLRA "strikes" and was not under "imminent danger."
- On appeal, counsel and amici argued (and the Seventh Circuit considered) scientific evidence linking prolonged solitary to increased self-harm, and identified a legal error in one of the district court’s strike assessments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wallace's allegations satisfy the § 1915(g) "imminent danger" exception | Wallace: prolonged solitary + serious mental illness + prior suicide attempts make self-harm imminent | District court: periodic suicidal ideation is not current "imminent" danger; prisoner cannot create imminent danger by threats | Court: Wallace plausibly alleged imminent danger; facts (11 years solitary, mental illness, history of attempts) satisfy the exception (citing Sanders) |
| Whether Wallace has three PLRA "strikes" so as to bar IFP | Wallace: only two prior qualifying dismissals; the third was denial of a motion to intervene and does not constitute "bringing a civil action" under § 1915(g) | District court treated three prior dismissals as strikes (including the intervention denial) | Court: The intervention denial was improperly counted as a strike; only two valid strikes exist, so Wallace is not barred on that basis |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanders v. Melvin, 873 F.3d 957 (7th Cir. 2017) (imminent-danger exception met for mentally ill prisoner in prolonged solitary)
- Ciarpaglini v. Saini, 352 F.3d 328 (7th Cir. 2003) (standard of de novo review for § 1915(g) interpretation)
- Evans v. Illinois Dep't of Corrections, 150 F.3d 810 (7th Cir. 1998) (review and framing of § 1915(g) analysis)
- Arnett v. Webster, 658 F.3d 742 (7th Cir. 2011) (treating well-pleaded allegations as true when assessing imminent-danger exception)
- In re Medley, 134 U.S. 160 (U.S. 1890) (historical reference on custody and risk)
- Davis v. Ayala, 135 S. Ct. 2187 (U.S. 2015) (concurring opinion noting research on solitary’s mental-health harms)
- Glossip v. Gross, 135 S. Ct. 2726 (U.S. 2015) (dissent discussing solitary-confinement research and harms)
- Fourstar v. Garden City Grp., Inc., 875 F.3d 1147 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (later courts need not defer to earlier strike designations)