Prisoner – Due Process Violation

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Steven D. Lisle, Jr., v. William Welborn, et al. 

Case No.: 18-1595

Officials: HAMILTON, BARRETT, and ST. EVE, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Prisoner – Due Process Violation

This appeal presents issues stemming from a prison’s discipline of a prisoner and his later suicide attempts. The story began in 2014 when correctional officers at the Menard Correctional Facility found contraband alcohol in the cell of plaintiff Steven D. Lisle, Jr. Lisle’s cellmate at first took responsibility for the contraband but later recanted outside of Lisle’s presence. He said instead that Lisle had been abusing him and had forced him to take the blame for the alcohol. In disciplinary proceedings, Lisle later asked to call a witness to testify about his cellmate’s initial admissions. His requests were ignored. Lisle, who is black, was sentenced to four months in disciplinary segregation. His cellmate, who was white, was not disciplined.

While in segregation, Lisle attempted to commit suicide three times. His third attempt was nearly successful, and he was placed on suicide watch in the prison infirmary. While there, Lisle claims, a nurse taunted him for his failed suicide attempts and encouraged him to try again. Lisle filed this suit alleging that he was punished based on his race, that he was deprived of liberty without due process of law, and that the prison staff’s conduct in the wake of his mental health crisis— including the nurse’s statements—amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.

The district court granted summary judgment on several claims but held a jury trial on Lisle’s claims for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. During jury selection, defense lawyers used peremptory strikes to remove three of the four black potential jurors. After the jury was selected, but before it was sworn and the venire released, Lisle’s counsel objected pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), challenging the use of peremptory strikes against the black jurors. The judge denied the objection as untimely.

Lisle appeals the summary judgment decision and seeks a new trial based on his Batson claim. We agree that his Batson claim was timely, and we cannot find that the erroneous denial was harmless. We remand for an evidentiary hearing on the Batson claim and, if necessary, a new trial on all claims that were tried. We also reverse summary judgment for the nurse on the taunting claim. We affirm all other aspects of the judgment.

Reversed in part. Vacated and remanded in part. Affirmed in part.

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.