No. 23-1854

JOSEPH SEGRAIN,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

WALTER DUFFY, alias, individually and in his official capacity as a Correctional Officer at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections; JAMES GLENDINNING, alias, individually and in his official capacity as a Correctional Officer at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections; RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; WAYNE T. SALISBURY, JR., alias, in his official capacity as Acting Director at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections; RONALD MELEO, alias, individually and in his official capacity as a Correctional Officer at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections,

Defendants, Appellees,

PATRICIA ANNE COYNE-FAGUE, alias, individually; JOHN DOES 1-5, alias, individually and in their official capacity as Correctional Officers at the Rhode Island Department of Corrections,

Defendants.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

[Hon. William E. Smith, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Montecalvo, Lipez, and Rikelman, Circuit Judges. Jared A. Goldstein, with whom Prisoners' Civil Rights Litigation Clinic, Roger Williams University School of Law was on brief, for appellant. James J. Arguin, Special Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.

September 23, 2024 MONTECALVO, Circuit Judge. This appeal concerns Joseph Segrain's civil lawsuit against the Rhode Island Department of Corrections and several correctional officers for alleged violations of his rights under the Eighth Amendment and various Rhode Island state laws. During all times relevant to this case, Segrain was detained at Rhode Island's Adult Correctional Institutions' (ACI's) maximum-security facility in Cranston. He alleges that officers used excessive force against him on June 28, 2018, when they executed a leg-sweep maneuver that knocked him to the ground, sprayed him in the face with pepper spray, and unnecessarily prolonged his pain from the pepper spray by holding him in a cell while handcuffed for a significant time before allowing him a decontamination shower. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the officers on all federal and state claims, and Segrain appealed. For the reasons explained below, we reverse the district court's judgment as to the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim that appellee Officer Walter Duffy's use of pepper spray violated Segrain's Eighth Amendment rights, vacate the district court's judgment as to the Rhode Island Constitution Article I, Section 8 claim regarding Duffy's use of pepper spray, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We affirm the district court's judgment on all other claims.

- 3 - I. Background

A. Factual Background

"We recount the facts in the light most favorable to [Segrain], who was the non-moving party at summary judgment." Ing v. Tufts Univ., 81 F.4th 77, 79 (1st Cir. 2023) (quoting Planadeball v. Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., 793 F.3d 169, 172 (1st Cir. 2015)), cert. denied, No. 23-1115, 2024 WL 2116351 (U.S. May 13, 2024).

1. The Leadup to the Alleged Constitutional Violations

Segrain was housed in the Disciplinary Confinement Unit of the ACI, operated by the Rhode Island Department of Corrections (RIDOC), when, on the morning of June 28, 2018, he was escorted from his cell to an area known as the "flats" for shower and recreation