Bailey v. Hobbs et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 9

ORDERED as follows: 1) The 6 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; 2) Plf's claims against Judge Truman M. Hobbs, Jr., and Assistant District Attorney Sherri Mazur seeking declaratory and injunctive relief are DISMISSED with preju dice under 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); 3) Plf's claims against Judge Truman M. Hobbs, Jr., and Assistant District Attorney Sherri Mazur seeking monetary damages are DISMISSED with prejudice under 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii); 4) Plf's challenge t o the constitutionality of his state-court sentence is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); 5) Plf's 1 motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED; and 6) This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process under 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii). Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 2/28/2017. (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
MATTHEW BAILEY, #290472,
Plaintiff,
v.
TRUMAN M. HOBBS, JR., and
SHERRI MAZUR,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:16-CV-922-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
Before the court is the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. # 6.)
There being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and based on a review
of the record, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 6) is

ADOPTED;
2.

Plaintiff’s claims against Judge Truman M. Hobbs, Jr., and Assistant

District Attorney Sherri Mazur seeking declaratory and injunctive relief are
DISMISSED with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i);
3.

Plaintiff’s claims against Judge Truman M. Hobbs, Jr., and Assistant

District Attorney Sherri Mazur seeking monetary damages are DISMISSED with
prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii);

4.

Plaintiff’s challenge to the constitutionality of his state-court sentence

is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii);
5.

Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. # 1) is DENIED;

6.

This case is DISMISSED prior to service of process under 28 U.S.C.

and

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii).
A final judgment will be entered separately.
DONE this 28th day of February, 2017.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2