Brooks v. Binford (INMATE 2)

Filing 6

ORDERED that:(1) The § 1983 claims presented against Defendant Binford are DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I) and (iii); (2) To the extent plaintiff's complaint presents a challen ge to the constitutionality of his current confinement, such claim is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); (3) This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii). Signed by Honorable Truman M. Hobbs on 9/10/2008. (cb, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA S O U T H E R N DIVISION A N T H O N Y TERRELL BROOKS, P l a in tif f , v. H E N R Y D. (BUTCH) BINFORD, C I R C U IT JUDGE OF H O U S T O N COUNTY, D e f e n d a n t. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER O n August 7, 2008, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to w h ic h no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 5). Upon an independent review of the f ile in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be a n d is hereby ADOPTED and that: 1. T h e § 1983 claims presented against Defendant Binford are DISMISSED with p reju d ice in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I) and (iii); 2. T o the extent plaintiff's complaint presents a challenge to the constitutionality o f his current confinement, such claim is DISMISSED without prejudice under 2 8 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii);

C IV IL ACTION NO. 1:08cv597-TMH

3.

T h is case is DISMISSED prior to service of process in accordance with the d irec tiv es of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii).

D o n e this the 10th day of September, 2008.

/s / Truman H. Hobbs _ _ _ _ _ _ ______________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ S E N IO R UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2