Arkansas “Jailhouse Attorney” Secures Return from Retaliatory Transfer Out of State
by Chuck Sharman
In a settlement reached on October 22, 2025, the Arkansas Department of Corrections (DOC) agreed to repatriate a state prisoner shipped to a federal lockup in West Virginia, restoring his job upon return in the law library at the Larry B. Norris Unit outside Pine Bluff. The deal resolved the claims of prisoner Abdul Maalik Muhammad, 40, whose federal lawsuit accused the DOC of retaliating against him for other civil rights cases he filed.
One of those ended up at the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS), which in 2015 agreed with Muhammad—then known as Gregory Holt—that the DOC’s ban on beards violated the rights of Muslim prisoners like him under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc. As PLN reported, the DOC claimed that the policy was necessary to combat contraband smuggling, to which Justice Samuel Alito objected that “[h]air on the head is a more plausible place to hide contraband than a 1/2-inch beard—and the same is true of an inmate’s clothing and shoes.”
“Nevertheless,” Alito concluded with a rhetorical pshaw, “the Department does not require inmates to go about bald, barefoot, or naked.” [See: PLN, Aug. 2015, p.50.]
Except that turned out not to be true. Holt sued the DOC again in 2022 when it refused him a religious exception to policies requiring prisoners to strip naked during cell checks and walk to the showers in nothing but boxer shorts and shower shoes. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas issued a temporary injunction of the second requirement on June 9, 2023. The parties then settled, and the district court entered judgment on June 26, 2025, requiring the DOC to let the prisoner leave his cell during shakedowns while dressed in “a t-shirt and pants that go below the knee.” See: Holt v. Payne, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3688 (E.D. Ark.); and 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121218 (E.D. Ark.).
Middle of the Night Transfer
Just over two weeks before that ruling, sometime after midnight on June 9, 2025, Muhammad was loaded into a transport and driven 14 hours without breaks to the U.S. Penitentiary in Hazelton, West Virginia. He had not been advised of the transfer, though it was requested by DOC Director Dexter Payne the previous May 1. Alleging that it was made in retaliation for his litigation activity, Muhammad filed suit in the district court to enjoin the transfer.
At a hearing on October 21, 2025, Payne testified that he was unfamiliar with the prisoner’s litigation activity. But in the transfer request he sent to the federal Bureau of Prisons, the prison system chief called Muhammad “a management problem” who “insists on being a jailhouse attorney and assisting other inmates in their legal ventures.”
The hearing was continued to the next day. But before that, the DOC agreed to the settlement returning Muhammad to Arkansas. In a further blow to Payne and the DOC, the parties’ stipulated dismissal was vacated on October 28, 2025, when the district court reopened the case specifically to maintain authority to enforce the settlement agreement. See: Holt v. Payne, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212508 (E.D. Ark.).
Muhammad was sentenced in 2010 to a 40-year term with the DOC upon his convictions for aggravated burglary and domestic battery, both with habitual offender enhancements because of a 2003 conviction for filing a false report. Since his incarceration, the prisoner has fought to protect not only his civil rights but also mentored fellow prisoners litigtating their own suits. Upon learning of the settlement that returned him to Arkansas, he said, “I always knew that justice would prevail, and today it has.”
The agreement also “zero[ed] out liens and charges” that Muhammad owed to the DOC; but a motion for attorneys fees and costs remains to be filed, and PLN will update details when it is finalizes. The prisoner is represented by attorneys John C. Williams, Shelby H. Shroff and Hadiyah Cummings of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas in Little Rock, as well as Aditya V. Kamdar, Carolyn M. Homer and Quinn V. Walker and Morrison & Foerster LLP in Washington, D.C. See: Holt v. Payne, USDC (E.D. Ark.), Case No. 4:25-cv-00699.
Holt and three fellow Muslim prisoners earlier beat back the DOC’s attempt to deny them weekly Jumu’ah prayer service because their beliefs weren’t “sincerely held,” as PLN also reported. In a November 2023 decision, the Eighth Circuit chided the DOC for attempting to peer into the prisoners’ hearts, ruling that “inquiry of what is or is not central to a particular religion has no place in an RLUIPA analysis,” nor is “perfect adherence” to allegedly burdened beliefs “required for a successful RLUIPA claim.” [See: PLN, Aug. 2024, p.20.]
After DOC accommodated their request, the prisoners objected that they were forced to share the service with adherents of the Nation of Islam and Nation of Gods and Earth. On August 8, 2025, the district court agreed that this also violated the RLUIPA and ordered the DOC to install a barrier in the room or else provide Muhammad and his fellow congregants a separate room. See: Holt v. Payne, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152894 (E.D. Ark).
Additional source: Arkansas Times
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Holt v. Payne
| Year | 2025 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152894 (E.D. Ark) |
| Level | District Court |