Dozier v. Price et al (INMATE1)

Filing 12

ORDER that the Plaintiff's 11 Objection is overruled. ORDER ADOPTING 10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Plaintiff's claims against Charles Price, D. T. Marshall, Ellen Brooks, Charles Law, and Michael K idd are DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii). 2. The plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama for a controlled substance offense is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as such claims are not properly before the court at this time. 3. This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii). Signed by Honorable W. Harold Albritton, III on 10/31/2008. (dmn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

FRED DOZIER, Plaintiff, vs. JUDGE PRICE, et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08cv762-WHA (WO)

ORDER This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #10), entered on September 30, 2008, and Plaintiff's objection (Doc. #11), filed on October 8, 2008. After an independent evaluation and de novo review of the file in this case, the court finds the Plaintiff's objection to be without merit, and it is hereby overruled. The court adopts the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Plaintiff's claims against Charles Price, D. T. Marshall, Ellen Brooks, Charles Law, and Michael Kidd are DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii). 2. The plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama for a controlled substance offense is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as such claims are not properly before the court at this time. 3. This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii).

DONE this 31st day of October, 2008.

/s/ W. Harold Albritton W. HAROLD ALBRITTON SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE