Gary Dale Hines v. James H. Gomez, et al.
Published: Jun. 17, 1995 | Result Date: Apr. 10, 1995 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: C920120EFL – $0
Judge
Court
USDC Northern
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Albert G. Stoll Jr.
(Albert G. Stoll Jr. ALC)
Defendant
Facts
Plaintiff Gary Dale Hines is a 27-year-old condemned inmate on death row at San Quentin State Prison. Defendants were the following correctional officers: Steve Pearson; Steve Szmaciarz; Mario Gates; Sandy Shaffer; Calvin Campbell; and Daron Jones. In November of 1991, Plaintiff Gary Dale Hines was successful in obtaining an order from Marin Superior Court requiring the correctional officers at San Quentin to open "legal mail" in the presence of the inmates; as a result, the guards at San Quentin had to be retrained in how to properly handle confidential inmate legal mail. Plaintiff alleged that this assertion of his rights and the proper use of the inmate appeals procedure motivated the Defendant correctional officers to retaliate against Plaintiff.
Settlement Discussions
No settlement discussions and no arbitrations were conducted.
Damages
Plaintiff asked for a verdict of $200 for the loss of use of his television set and punitive damages against the guards of $1,000 each.
Injuries
Wrist strain from the excessive force; loss of the use of his television set; and false Serious Rules Violations or CDC 115's.
Result
The jury found the following: (1) Officer Pearson falsely accused Plaintiff of a serious rules violation (CDC 115), in retaliation for Plaintiff's use of the prison appeals system; (2) Pearson gave false testimony at a disciplinary hearing related to Plaintiff's alleged unauthorized attempt to receive an object from another inmate; (3) Pearson's false accusations did not advance any legitimate penological goal; (4) Pearson's conduct was extreme, outrageous, and was committed maliciously or wantonly; (5) Szmaciarz knowingly made a false finding that Plaintiff had violated prison rules by tampering with the security seals of his television (no retaliatory motive); (6) Szmaciarz knowingly made false finding that Plaintiff had violated prison rules by attempting to receive an object from another inmate and by threatening officer Pearson; (7) Szmaciarz' motive for false findings was retaliation; (8) Szmaciarz' conduct in making false findings did not advance any legitimate penological goal; Szmaciarz' conduct was extreme and outrageous and was committed maliciously or wantonly; (9) Officer Gates used force which was clearly more than warranted under all the circumstances (although not maliciously and sadistically for the purpose of causing Plaintiff harm, therefore no excessive force) (10) and Shaffer knowingly and falsely accused Plaintiff of tampering with the security seals on his television in violation of prison rules (no retaliation).
Deliberation
1.5 days
Poll
10-0
Length
4 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390