United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
William C. Griesbach, United States District Judge.
Edward Louis Esposito, who is currently incarcerated at the
Racine County Jail and representing himself, filed a
complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his
civil rights were violated. This matter comes before the
court on Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without
prepaying the full filing fee and to screen the complaint.
to Proceed without Prepayment of the Filing Fee
has requested leave to proceed without prepayment of the full
filing fee (in forma pauperis). A prisoner plaintiff
proceeding in forma pauperis is required to pay the
full amount of the $350.00 filing fee over time. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Plaintiff has filed a certified
copy of his prison trust account statement for the six-month
period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint, as
required under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Because Plaintiff
lacks the funds to pay an initial partial filing fee, the
court waives the initial partial filing fee and will grant
Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without
prepayment of the full filing fee.
of the Complaint
court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners
seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the
prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous
or malicious, ” that fail to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b). A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an
arguable basis either in law or in fact. Denton v.
Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992); Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Hutchinson ex
rel. Baker v. Spink, 126 F.3d 895, 900 (7th Cir. 1997).
state a cognizable claim under the federal notice pleading
system, Plaintiff is required to provide a “short and
plain statement of the claim showing that [he] is entitled to
relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The complaint must
contain sufficient factual matter “that is plausible on
its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). The court accepts the factual
allegations as true and liberally construes them in the
plaintiff's favor. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d
645, 651 (7th Cir. 2013). Nevertheless, the complaint's
allegations “must be enough to raise a right to relief
above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550
U.S. at 555 (citation omitted).
of the Complaint
alleges that, on July 6, 2019, he was taken to the hospital
by ambulance to be treated for stab wounds and other
injuries. Hospital staff stitched up two stab wounds in his
left thigh and took pictures of those injuries. Plaintiff was
then taken to the Racine County Jail. After the intake
process on July 8, 2019, Plaintiff showered and found two
more stab wounds. He found a laceration across his nose and a
stab wound in his right palm. Plaintiff sent a request for a
deputy to take pictures of his wounds and to file charges.
claims he sent eleven requests to have pictures taken of his
injuries to the correctional officer on duty and to the
captain but did not receive a response. He asserts that the
wounds have healed, and he does not have pictures for his
criminal case. Plaintiff claims his equal protection rights
under the Fourteenth Amendment have been violated.
names the Racine County Jail as the sole defendant. Plaintiff
may not proceed against the Jail in this case because it is a
non-suable entity under § 1983. See Smith v. Knox
Cty. Jail, 666 F.3d 1037, 1040 (7th Cir. 2012). Even if
Plaintiff had properly named defendants in this action, he
has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Although Plaintiff may have desired to have pictures taken of
his injuries, Plaintiff does not have a constitutional right
to have pictures taken of any injuries. See, e.g.,
Wood v. Rubenstein, No. 5:12CV174, 2013 WL 5504143
(N.D.W.V. Oct. 1, 2013) (“There is no constitutional
right to have pictures taken of an injury.”);
Dennison v. O'Fallon, No. CV 06-I05M-DWM-JCL,
2007 WL 1593069, at *2 (D. Mont. Apr. 11, 2007) (holding
plaintiff had no constitutional right to compel prison
officials to take pictures that plaintiff may use in court
because the lack of such evidence does not prevent him from
bringing a case); Boykin v. Curry, No. 5:08-CV-224,
2009 WL 152524, at *2 (M.D. Ga. Jan. 20, 2009). Plaintiff has
failed to allege any violation of a constitutionally
protected right. Accordingly, his complaint must be dismissed
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be
plaintiff has provided no arguable basis for relief, having
failed to make any rational argument in law or fact to
support his claims. See House v. Belford, 956 F.2d
711, 720 (7th Cir. 1992) (quoting Williams v.
Faulkner, 837 F.2d 304, 308 (7th Cir. 1988),
aff'd sub nom. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319
IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for
leave to proceed in forma ...