Leger v. State of Alabama (INMATE 2)

Filing 8

OPINION and ORDER ADOPTING 7 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; ORDER directing as follows: 1) That the plf's complaint against the dft State of Alabama be and is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the directives of 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii); 2) That the plf's claims challenging event which occurred prior to 5/15/2007, be and are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to the directives of 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as the plf failed to file the complaint with regard to these allegations within the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitations; 3) That the plf's challenge to the validity of his conviction and/or detention be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and 4) That this case be and is hereby DISMISSED prior to service of process. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 7/31/2009. (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA E A ST E R N DIVISION LE O DANIEL LEGER, #258677, P l a i n t i ff , v. STAT E OF ALABAMA, D e fe n d a n t. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

C IV IL ACTION NO. 3:09cv474-ID (WO)

O P I N I O N and ORDER O n July 9, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to which n o timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and u p o n consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge which is hereby A D O P T E D , it is ORDERED as follows: 1. T h a t the plaintiff's complaint against the defendant State of Alabama be and

is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B ) ( i) - ( i ii ) ; 2. T h a t the plaintiff's claims challenging event which occurred prior to May 15,

2 0 0 7 , be and are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as the plaintiff failed to file the complaint with regard to these allegations w ith in the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitations; 3. T h a t the plaintiff's challenge to the validity of his conviction and/or detention

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

4.

T h a t this case be and is hereby DISMISSED prior to service of process.

D o n e this the 31 st day of July, 2009.

/s/ Ira DeMent SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2