Castaneda v. Shelby County Sheriff's Office et al

Filing 21

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 10/16/2015. (JLC)

Download PDF
FILED 2015 Oct-16 AM 10:51 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ALEJANDROS CASTANEDA, Plaintiff vs. SHELBY COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al., Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:14-cv-02337-VEH-HGD MEMORANDUM OF OPINION The magistrate judge filed a report on August 20, 2015, 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)(1). The plaintiff filed objections to the report and recommendation on September 11, 2015. (Doc. 19). The plaintiff objects to the magistrate judge’s finding that his claims are barred by the doctrine set forth in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). Citing Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533, 539 (1988), he contends that because his claims here involve unreasonable search issues and denial of adequate medical care issues, they would not “necessarily” imply the invalidity of his conviction and therefore would Page 1 of 2 not violate Heck.1 However, the magistrate judge correctly noted that any claims outside the purview of Heck would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Therefore, assuming arguendo that the plaintiff’s objections regarding the Heck issue have merit, this action is still due to be dismissed by reason of the expiration of the statute of limitations, and his objections with regard to Heck are moot. Accordingly, having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation and the plaintiff’s 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. Therefore, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), 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 contemporaneously herewith. DATED this 16th day of October, 2015. VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS United States District Judge 1 The plaintiff acknowledges that his claims alleging conspiracy between prosecutors and the state court could be barred by Heck, but argues that those claims should have been reviewed in light of the holding in Murray, and only after service on the defendants and a “chance of discovery.” (Doc. 19 at 4). Page 2 of 2

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?