Poulin v. Leal et al, No. 1:2012cv00126 - Document 15 (N.D. Tex. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER declining to adopt 11 Findings and Recommendations on Case, and finding that Plaintiff has stated claims of constitutional violations sufficient to require responsive pleadings from Defendants Leal, Correll, Smith, Arrendall, T. Huggins, M. Huggins, Bartley, Cohen, Richards, Cotton, and the TDCJC-ID. Defendants Leal, Correll, Smith, Arrendall, T. Huggins, M. Huggins, Bartley, Cohen, Richards, Cotton, and the TDCJ-CID shall each file a written answer or other responsive pleading within 30 days from the date the Inmate Litigation Coordinator receives this Order. (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 7/19/2013) (rlw)

Download PDF
Poulin v. Leal et al Doc. 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ABILENE DIVISION JESSE E. POULIN, $ TDCJ.CID NO. 544205, stD No. 43t6638, $ $ $ Plaintiff, $ $ v. $ RICHARD G. LEAL, Assistant et al., Warden, crvrl ACTTON No. 1:12-CV-00126-C $ $ $ $ Defendants. $ ECF ORDER Plaintiff Jesse E. Poulin filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. $ 1983 and named Assistant Warden Richard G. Leal, Captain Adrian L. Correll, Lieutenant Margret A. Smith, Sergeant Clayton J. Anendall, Officer Timothy A. Huggins, Officer Marcus W. Huggins, Officer Amber L. Bartley, Officer Smadar Cohen, Officer Jessica L. Richards, and Gary M. Cotton, employees of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division ("TDCJ- CID") French Robertson Unit as Defendants. Because Plaintiff has failed to clariff whether he is suing the Defendants in their individual capacities, official capacities, or both, the Court shall assume that he is suing the named individuals in both capacities. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants subjected him to an unnecessary strip search and cavity search in the presence of females who were not his wife in violation of his constitutional right to privacy, his free exercise right to practice modesty and humility as a part of his Muslim faith, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Dockets.Justia.com In light of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Robledo v. Leal, USCA No. 1210441, an unpublished opinion issued on June 2l,2013,this Court declines to adopt the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation filed on November 20, 20t2, and finds that Plaintiff has stated claims of constitutional violations sufficient to require responsive pleadings from Defendants Leal, Conell, Smith, Arrendall, T. Huggins, M. Huggins, Bartley, Cohen, Richards, Cotton, andthe TDCJCID. It is, therefore, ORDERED: l. A copy ofthis Order and Plaintiff s complaint shall be mailed to the Inmate Litigation Coordinator, Enforcement Division, P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711-2548, by certified mail, return receipt requested; and 2. Defendants Leal, Correll, Smith, Arrendall, T. Huggins, M. Huggins, Bartley, Cohen, Richards, Cotton, and the TDCJ-CID shall each file a wriuen answer or other responsive pleading within thirty (30) days from the date the Inmate Litigation Coordinator receives this Order. Dated huty /4 ,2013. INGS

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.