Plaintiff's Attorney Nicholas Gladu, Pro Se Maine State
Defendant's Attorney Jim Fortin, AAG
DECISION AND ORDER
William R. Stokes, Justice
Gladu is an inmate at the Maine State Prison (MSP) who is
housed in the Administrative Control Unit (ACU). He sought to
bring a grievance utilizing the prison's grievance policy
concerning his complaint that he was not receiving a period
of "intensive security and programming" while
residing in the ACU. His grievance was dismissed by the
Grievance Review Officer (GRO) on the basis that "[a]
separate appeal procedure exists." Gladu has brought his
petition pursuant to M.R.Civ.P. 80C and 5 M.R.S.
§§11001 et. seq. (Maine Administrative Procedure
court has reviewed the Administrative Record, including the
following policies promulgated by the Maine Department of
Corrections (MDOC); 29.01 Client Grievance Rights;
15.5 Special Management Prisoners; 23.1
Classification and Case Management, and; 23.4
Classification and Case Management. The court has
also considered the briefs submitted by the parties. The
court is satisfied that the GRO correctly dismissed
29, 2018, Gladu submitted a "Prisoner Grievance
Form" complaining that he had requested, and been
denied, "the intensive programming and education set
forth in MDOC Policy 15.5." His grievance was not
informally resolved and he pursued the matter to the
Grievance Review Officer (Step 1). As noted above, the GRO
dismissed the grievance. The sole issue before the court is
whether the GRO abused his discretion or committed an error
of law by dismissing Gladu's grievance.
MDOC Policy providing for a grievance procedure explicitly
states: "A prisoner may not file a grievance regarding
the following subjects, since there exists separate appellate
procedures for these matters: (a) Classification procedures
and decisions, including but not limited to, . . . a decision
about custody level, a work assignment, participation in an
institutional or community-based program . . . ." Policy
No. 29.01, Sect. VI, Proc. C (2).
at the Maine State Prison who are housed in the ACU receive
an orientation to the unit and are the subject of an
Individualized Case Plan. Policy No. 15.5, Sect. VI, Proc D
(2). Prisoners in ACU are to have access to programs and
services, including education programs, consistent with
safety and administrative feasibility. Policy 15.5, Proc. D
case management model used at MSP is the subject of Policy
No. 23.4, which emphasizes the development, monitoring and
review of a prisoner's Individualized Case Plan. Policy
23.4, Sect. VI, Procs. B and C. All of this is part of the
classification system and process, with its built-in periodic
reviews and appeal process. See Policy 32.1. Certain
classification decisions, such as custody level and facility
transfer, may be appealed to the Director of Classifications.
"... [A]ll other classification matters may be appealed
to the Chief Administrative Officer, or designee, within five
(5) working days of receiving the decision . . . ."
Policy No. 23.1, Proc I (1).
it is clear that the GRO correctly dismissed Gladu's
grievance, which sought to grieve the classification decision
pertaining to what programs and services are part of his
Individualized Case Plan. The policy governing classification
decisions has its own appeal procedure. As such, those
decisions cannot be grieved through the prisoner grievance
Petition for Judicial Review is DENIED.
Petitioner's Motion for Leave to ...