## Facts

- Eugene L. Cherry, a Wisconsin prisoner, was confined at the Wisconsin Secure Program Facility, the state’s “supermax” or extended-control institution.
- Cherry alleged that prison officials exercised extraordinary control over his daily life and subjected him to near-total isolation.
- According to the complaint, Cherry’s physical contact with other human beings was limited to encounters with guards when he was placed in restraints.
- Cherry alleged that most verbal communication occurred through an intercom system with staff or through a ventilation system with other inmates.
- He alleged additional restrictions that limited sensory stimulation and amounted to sensory deprivation.
- Cherry also alleged that officials restricted his access to media (such as reading materials) even though administrative regulations authorized him to possess certain items.
- Cherry asserted that the combination of prolonged isolation, limited stimulation, and limited communication posed a serious risk of psychological harm and could impair normal brain functioning.
- In describing Cherry’s background, the court noted an evaluation stating that Cherry was “very antisocial and criminally oriented” and reported no history of mental-health treatment or psychotropic medications.
- Cherry brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Wisconsin corrections officials, including Department of Corrections leadership, challenging conditions of confinement.
- The court addressed the case at the Prison Litigation Reform Act screening stage, deciding whether Cherry could proceed on an Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim.

## Issues

1. Whether Cherry’s allegations about extreme isolation, sensory deprivation, and denial of authorized media stated an Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim sufficient to proceed past PLRA screening.
2. Whether Cherry’s allegations permitted an inference that the responsible prison officials knew of and disregarded a substantial risk of serious harm from those conditions.

## Decision

- The court granted Cherry leave to proceed on an Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim based on alleged extreme social isolation, sensory deprivation, and related restrictions (including limits on media) at the supermax facility.
- At the screening stage, the court accepted Cherry’s factual allegations as true and concluded they were sufficient to satisfy the objective and subjective components required for an Eighth Amendment claim, at least for pleading purposes.
- To the extent Cherry asserted additional theories that were not adequately pleaded or not properly tied to actionable constitutional standards or responsible defendants, the court dismissed or limited those claims during screening.
- The order allowed the case to go forward against the appropriate prison officials; it was not a final merits determination after discovery.

## Legal Principles

- Under the PLRA, courts must screen prisoner complaints and dismiss claims that are frivolous, fail to state a claim, or seek relief from immune defendants.
- An Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim requires (1) an objectively serious deprivation or a substantial risk of serious harm and (2) a showing that officials acted with deliberate indifference to that risk.
- Supermax confinement is not automatically unconstitutional, but conditions that impose extreme and prolonged social isolation and sensory deprivation may satisfy the objective seriousness requirement when they plausibly threaten serious psychological harm.
- At the pleading stage, a prisoner may satisfy the deliberate-indifference element by alleging that officials were aware of the harmful character of the conditions and nonetheless maintained, enforced, or continued them.
- A violation of prison regulations, standing alone, does not establish a constitutional violation; however, alleged denial of authorized media may be considered as part of the overall conditions analysis when tied to serious deprivation and risk of harm.

## Conclusion

Cherry’s complaint plausibly alleged that supermax conditions involving near-total isolation, severe limits on human contact and stimulation, and restrictions on authorized media created a substantial risk of serious psychological harm, and that prison officials maintained those conditions with awareness of the risk; the court therefore allowed him to proceed on an Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim past PLRA screening while dismissing or narrowing other insufficiently pleaded theories.


Cherry v. Litscher, 2002 WL 32350051 (2002)