Jacks v. Moeller et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION ADOPTING and ACCEPTING the 10 Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and OVERRULING Plaintiff's 11 Objections. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 4/10/2018. (JLC)
2018 Apr-10 PM 05:12
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
PHILLIP HUGH JACKS,
RANDY MOELLER, et al.,
) Case No. 1:18-cv-00286-VEH-HNJ
The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on March 16, 2018,
recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). (Doc. 10). The
plaintiff was notified of his right to file objections within fourteen (14) days of the
report and recommendation (id.), and on March 30, 2018, the court received a letter
from the plaintiff which is construed as an objection (doc. 11).
The plaintiff objects to the magistrate judge’s finding that he fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. 12 at 1). The plaintiff seeks to have this court
force the state court to act, specifically to either return an indictment against him or
dismiss the pending charges. As explained in the report and recommendation, the
plaintiff’s remedies lie in the realm of habeas corpus and not under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
(Doc. 10 at 8).
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court
file, including the report and recommendation, the plaintiff’s objections are
The magistrate judge’s report is hereby ADOPTED and the
recommendation is ACCEPTED.
Therefore, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b), this action is due to be dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted.
A Final Judgment will be entered.
DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of April, 2018.
VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS
United States District Judge
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?