In DeMoss v. Crain, (5th Cir., March 2, 2011), the 5th Circuit rejected a Muslim inmate's 1st Amendment and RLUIPA challenges to prison policies that required inmate-led religious services to be tape recorded when there is no staff member or outside volunteer present; barred inmates from carrying a pocket-sized Bible or Qur'an; required inmates to be clean-shaven; and did not permit inmates to stand for extended periods of time in prison dayrooms. A challenge to a policy that prohibited inmates confined to their cells for disciplinary infractions from attending religious services was dismissed as moot since the policy has been changed.
In Perez v. Williams, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5109 (5th Cir., March 11, 2011), the 5th Circuit agreed with the district court that an inmate's free exercise claim was frivolous. Plaintiff complained that prison policy prohibits him from carrying his Bible or anything else other than his identification card on the recreation yard.
In Kates v. Micieli, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24580 (WD LA, Feb. 23, 2011), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24078, Feb. 7, 2011) and rejected a Muslim inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when over a two day period he could not pray 5 times per day because he was placed in restraints for 18 hours.
In Johnson v. Varano, 2011 Pa. Commw. Unpub. LEXIS 194 (PA Commnw., March 9, 2011), a Pennsylvania state appellate court dismissed a Muslim inmate's free exercise claims against the Superintendent and kitchen staff growing out of a single incident in which the inmate was served pork. However the court remanded for further proceedings the question of whether the inmate had a cause of action in tort against the food services provider.
In Woodall v. Schwarzenegger, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24395 (SD CA, March 9, 2011), a California federal district court permitted an inmate to proceed with his claim that prison officials destroyed his religious books.
In Washington-El v. Beard, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141953 (WD PA, Dec. 16, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended that an inmate be permitted to proceed with his free exercise and RLUIPA claims that he was unable to attend religious services because of his placement on the Restricted Release List. A federal district judge adopted this portion of the magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24562, March 11, 2011).
In Dove v. Broome County Corretional Facility, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24528 (ND NY, March 10, 2011), a New York federal district court accepted a magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25219, Feb. 17, 2011) and dismissed a Jewish inmate's complaint that he was denied kosher food for 30 days after having been observed eating a non-kosher meal when delivery of his kosher meal was delayed.
In Goodwin v. Hamilton, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25790 (ED MI, March 14, 2011), a Michigan federal district court rejected a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142004, Jan. 13, 2011), and found that plaintiff had not presented sufficient evidence to support his Establishment Clause challenge to his attendance at a religiously-based substance abuse program after a parole violation. There was no evidence that plaintiff informed the staff of his objections to attending.
In Briley v. Cole, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25910 (ED AR, March 11, 2011), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142011, Dec. 2, 2010) and permitted an inmate to proceed with his claims that his free exercise rights were violated when prison officials refused to provide him with nutritionally adequate meatless meals.
