Buggs v. Almond et al
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION -The court is of the opinion that the Magistrate Judge's Report is due to be dismissed for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and all pending motions 28 , 29 , 30 , 32 , 33 are due to be denied as they are moot. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 9/10/2012. (AVC)
2012 Sep-10 PM 01:48
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
DYNASSUS NUAL BUGGS,
BRAD ALMOND, et al.,
Case No. 7:11-cv-03682-RDP-RRA
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on July 5, 2012, recommending
that this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for
failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and
Recommendation on July 18, 2012.
In his objections, Plaintiff states that the state criminal case in which he was detained was
concluded on May 3, 2011 when Judge Almond found him not guilty by reason of mental disease
or defect. Plaintiff essentially repeats the claims made in his original complaint, challenging the
legality of his detainment and the conditions of his confinement prior to that determination.
However, Judge Charles R. Malone, Judge Brad Almond, and Judge John H. England, Jr. are
shielded by absolute judicial immunity and Deputy District Attorney Daniel Prewitt by prosecutorial
immunity. Further, Plaintiff has failed to show the requisite prejudice to support a denial of access
to the court’s claim against Defendant Taylor. As for the claims against Defendant Sexton, Plaintiff
has failed to allege facts sufficient to state a claim against him for false imprisonment. While it is
clear that continued detention of a prisoner in the face of facts which show that he is entitled to
release may result in a Fourteenth Amendment violation, Plaintiff has not shown that he was entitled
to release; indeed, in his initial complaint, he conceded that he was held on the order of Judges
Almond and England pending evaluations of his sanity and competence at the time of the offense.
To the extent Plaintiff complains he did not receive psychiatric treatment for a mental illness during
his incarceration, he does not allege that he was suffering symptoms which required such treatment,
or that he requested medical care of any type — physical or psychological — and was denied an
evaluation to determine such need by Defendant Sexton. Finally, Plaintiff’s request for release must
be presented in a petition for writ of habeas corpus. No such petition has been filed.
Thus, 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)
for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and all pending motions (Docs. #28,
29, 30, 32, 33) are due to be denied as they are moot. An appropriate order will be entered.
DONE and ORDERED this
day of September, 2012.
R. DAVID PROCTOR
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?