Beamon v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE1)

Filing 7

ORDER that the plaintiff's 4 Objection to the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is overruled. The 3 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION is adopted. Plaintiff's claims against the State of Alabama, the Montgomery County Courthouse, Charles Pr ice, and Randall Thomas are DISMISSED with prejudice under the directives of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii). Plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by the Circuit Court of Mont gomery County, Alabama for first degree robbery 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. This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process as required by the directives of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(b)(i), (ii), and (iii). Signed by Honorable Truman M. Hobbs on 3/6/2009. (dmn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA OF N O R T H E R N DIVISION J A M E S BEAMON, #166666, P l a i n t if f , v. S T A T E OF ALABAMA, et al., D e f e n d a n ts . ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

C A S E NO. 2:09-cv-082-TMH WO

ORDER
A f te r an independent review of the file, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE o f the court that: 1 . The plaintiff's objection (Doc. # 4) to the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge f ile d on February 17, 2009 is overruled; 2 . The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #3 ) filed on February 3, 2009 is adopted; 3 . Plaintiff's claims against the State of Alabama, the Montgomery County C o u rth o u s e , Charles Price and Randall Thomas are DISMISSED with prejudice under the d irec tiv es of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii). 4 . Plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence imposed u p o n him by the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama for first degree robbery is D IS M IS S E D without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as s u c h claims are not properly before the court at this time.

5 . This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process as required by the directives o f 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii). D O N E this 6th day of March, 2009.

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

2