Black v. Butler et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 12-633. (MSN)
2013 Nov-19 AM 10:08
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MICHAEL EUGENE BLACK,
WARDEN FREDDIE BUTLER, et al.,
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on October 22, 2013, recommending
that this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The
plaintiff filed objections to the report and recommendation on November 12, 2013.
The plaintiff objects to the finding of the magistrate judge that he failed to submit any
evidence to support his claim that Warden Butler, Officer Pearce and other guards are part of a
conspiracy, “to hinder/avoid my appeal of my wrongful conviction and deny me “due process of law
and to stall/avoid the investigation by the State of Alabama Attorney General’s office into my being
“set up”/framed and cover up a fraud in a related case in Colbert County Circuit Judge Harold
Hughston’s Court.” (Doc. 11, p.1) The plaintiff provides a summary of his mental health
appointments and experiences with Dr. Damone as support for his continued claim against the
defendants. These additional facts fail to support the plaintiff’s claim that the defendants have
conspired to hinder the appeal of his criminal case.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including
the report and recommendation and the objections thereto, the Court is of the opinion that the
magistrate judge's report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the recommendation is
ACCEPTED. Accordingly, the complaint is due to be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
A Final Judgment will be entered.
Done this 19th day of November 2013.
L. Scott Coogler
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?