Edwards v. Brandy et al
ORDER dismissing James Edwards' complaint with prejudice. This dismissal counts as a "strike" for purposes of 28 U.S.C.A. Section 1915(g) (West 2006). The Court further certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/13/2011. (jct)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
Case No. 3:10-cv-287-DPM
JOHN BRANDY, Mississippi
County Public Defender; JANE
DOE, Assistant to John Brandy;
and HAWK, Owner of Hawk
Pawn Shop & Supply
James Edwards filed this pro se section 1983 action alleging that in
September 2010, during state court proceedings, Defendant Brandy and his
assistant directed Edwards to sign a paper that waived his rights to appeal.
Edwards states that he did not understand what he signed and asks that the
document be overturned. The statutory screening, 28 V.S.C.A. § 1915A (West
2006), reveals defects.
A pro se plaintiff's allegations must be construed liberally. Atkinson v.
Bohn, 91 F.3d 1127, 1129 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). The Court must also
weigh all factual allegations in Edwards's favor, unless the facts alleged are
clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). But whether a
plaintiff has counselor appears pro se, his complaint must allege specific facts
sufficient to state a claim. Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985).
Edwards must plead"enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible
on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,570 (2007).
A section 1983 violation occurs when a person acting under color of law
deprives another person of "rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the
Constitution and laws" of the United States. 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West 2003).
Edwards fails to establish state action on the part of his court-appointed
public defenders, Brandy and Brandy's assistant. A public defender does not
act under color of state law when representing a defendant in a criminal
proceeding. Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312,325 (1981). Hawk, the owner
of Hawk Pawn Shop & Supply, is not a state actor, and the complaint alleges
no action under color of state law. Therefore, no § 1983 claim exists on the
pleaded facts. DuBose v. Kelly, 187 F.3d 999, 1002 (8th Cir. 1999).
The Court dismisses Edwards's complaint with prejudice.
dismissal counts as a "strike" for purposes of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(g) (West
2006). The Court further certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this
Order would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(a)(3) (West 2006).
D.P. Marsha11 Jr.
United States District Judge
1 ,tJNe ;to U
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?