Beamon v. State of Alabama (INMATE1)

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING 4 Report and Recommendations, the plaintiff's claims against the State of Alabama be dismissed with prejudice under the directives of 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)(ii) and (iii); 3) the plaintiff's challenge to the constitutional ity of the convictions and sentences imposed upon him in 2008 by the CC of Montgomery Co., AL for robbery and kidnapping and any claims related to the revocation of his parole based on such charges be summarily dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as these claims are not properly before the court at this time; and 4) this case be dismissed prior to service of process as required by the directives of 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii). Signed by Honorable Truman M. Hobbs on 3/3/09. (Attachments: # 1 appeals checklist)(vma, )

THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION J A M E S BEAMON, AIS # 166666, Plaintiff, v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

2:09-CV-79-TMH [W O ]

S T A T E OF ALABAMA, Defendant.

ORDER
O n February 3, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. 4) in this c a se to which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is O R D E R E D that: 1. 2. T h e Recommendation (Doc. 4) of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; T h e plaintiff's claims against the State of Alabama be DISMISSED with p reju d ice under the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii); 3. T h e plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the convictions and sen ten c es imposed upon him in 2008 by the Circuit Court of Montgomery C o u n ty, Alabama for robbery and kidnapping and any claims related to the re v o c a tio n of his parole based on such charges be summarily DISMISSED w ith o u t prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) a s these claims are not properly before the court at this time; and

4.

T h is case be DISMISSED prior to service of process as required by the d irec tiv es of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii).

A n appropriate judgment will be entered. D o n e this 3 r d day of March, 2009.

/s / Truman M. Hobbs S E N IO R UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2