Morrissey v. Christian et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 10

JUDGMENT: the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) The plf's 5 objections are overruled; (2) The US Magistrate Judge's 4 recommendation is adopted and this case is dismissed in its entirety as set forth in the rest o f this judgment; (3) The plf's challenge to the constitutionality of her arrest and her claim regarding the lack of a post-arrest investigation by law enforcement officials are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I) as the plf failed to file the complaint before the statute of limitations expired and because the latter claim provides no basis for relief; (4) To the extent the plf presents a claim of malicious prosecution with respect to her con viction, this claim is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as this claim is not one on which relief can currently be granted; (5) The plf's claims challenging the constitutionality of her con viction are dismissed without prejudice in accordance with the directives of 28 USC § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), as such claims are must be pursued in a habeas-corpus petition, not a 42 USC § 1983 civil action; further ORDERED that costs are taxed against the plf, for which execution may issue; DIRECTING the clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 FRCP; This case is closed. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 8/31/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) (wcl, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION DECKRICE L. MORRISSEY, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. CHRISTOPHER CHRISTIAN, et al., Defendants. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15cv500-MHT (WO) JUDGMENT In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) The plaintiff's objections (doc. no. 5) are overruled. (2) The United States Magistrate Judge's recommendation (doc. no. 4) is adopted and this case is dismissed in its entirety as set forth in the rest of this judgment. (3) The plaintiff’s challenge to the constitutionality of her arrest and her claim regarding the lack of enforcement pursuant a post-arrest officials to the are investigation dismissed provisions with of 28 by law prejudice U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I) as the plaintiff failed to file the complaint before the statute of limitations expired and because the latter claim provides no basis for relief. (4) of To the extent the plaintiff presents a claim malicious prosecution with respect to her conviction, this claim is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as this claim is not one on which relief can currently be granted. (5) The plaintiff’s constitutionality of claims her challenging conviction are the dismissed without prejudice in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), as such claims are must be pursued in a habeas-corpus petition, not a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil action. It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against the plaintiff, for which execution may issue. 2 The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil pursuant to Rule 58 of docket the as a Federal final Rules judgment of Procedure. This case is closed. DONE, this the 31st day of August, 2015. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Civil

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?