Hampton v. Baldwin et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 55

ORDER: On 4/6/2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a 53 Recommendation. Plaintiff timely filed an 54 Objection, but the objection does not challenge the Magistrate Judges Recommendation that Officers Johnson and Joushua be dismissed on grounds that there is no record that officers by these names participated in the shakedown at Draper Correctional Facility. Rather, Plaintiff contends that he has been unable to ascertain the identities of the additional officers who participated in the shaked own. An objection is not the proper place to raise this argument. Based upon an independent and de novo review, it is ORDERED as follows: (1) Plaintiffs objection (Doc. 54 ) is OVERRULED; (2) The Magistrate Judges Recommendation (Doc. 53 ) is AD OPTED; (3) Plaintiffs claims against Officers Johnson and Joushua are dismissed, and the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate these officers as Defendants; and (4) This action is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for additional proceedings against Defendants Baldwin, Ellington, Williams, Copeland, and Melton. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 4/24/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(dmn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
LAWRENCE HAMPTION,
#197002,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAPT. BALDWIN, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:16-CV-973-WKW

ORDER
On April 6, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation. (Doc. # 53.)
Plaintiff timely filed an objection, but the objection does not challenge the
Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation that Officers Johnson and Joushua be
dismissed on grounds that there is no record that officers by these names participated
in the shakedown at Draper Correctional Facility. (Doc. # 54.) Rather, Plaintiff
contends that he has been unable to ascertain the identities of the additional officers
who participated in the shakedown. An objection is not the proper place to raise this
argument.
Based upon an independent and de novo review, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1)

Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. # 54) is OVERRULED;

(2)

The Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation (Doc. # 53) is ADOPTED;

(3)

Plaintiff’s claims against Officers Johnson and Joushua are dismissed,

and the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate these officers as Defendants;
and
(4)

This action is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for additional

proceedings against Defendants Baldwin, Ellington, Williams, Copeland, and
Melton.
DONE this 24th day of April, 2017.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2