Johnson et al v. Champion

Filing 50

ORDER denying 45 Motion For Federal Criminal Investigation. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 1/24/2013. Copy mailed to Plaintiffs. (tgw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
REGINALD JOHNSON, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
RANDALL CHAMPIONS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
) CIVIL ACTION 12-0334-WS-M
)
)
)
)
ORDER

The plaintiffs have filed a “motion for an [sic] federal criminal
investigation.” (Doc. 45). The plaintiffs, citing no authority, insist the Court has a
“mandatory administrative dut[y] to receive any offer of information of a federal
crime” and commits “a felony under related obstruction of justice statutes” if he
“blocks such report.” (Id. at 2).
The Court has conducted an expansive search of the entirety of federal
jurisprudence and has located only three instances in which a party has filed a
“motion for criminal investigation.” In all three, the motion was summarily
denied, without discussion. Brennan v. Aulls, 1987 WL 38439 at *1 (6th Cir.
1987); Stewart v. Warden, 2012 WL 141476 at *1 n.1 (D. Md. 2012); Fleming v.
Lackawanna County, 2010 WL 4224626 at *1 (M.D. Pa. 2010). The Court does
likewise. The motion for a federal criminal investigation is denied.1
DONE and ORDERED this 24th day of January, 2013.
s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

By its action, the Court does not “block” the plaintiffs’ request; the Court simply
leaves the plaintiffs to the ordinary means of seeking such an investigation, i.e., by
communication directly with law enforcement authorities.