Elliott et al v. Crump et al

Filing 10

ORDER dismissing Plaintiff's case without prejudice for failure to state a federal claim for relief. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 06/21/2013. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION DEWAYNE ELLIOTT V. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 3:13CV00121 BSM ANDRE CRUMP and TERRY HODGES DEFENDANTS ORDER Plaintiff Dewayne Elliott, an inmate housed at the Mississippi County Detention Facility, filed this case pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his constitutional rights were violated. [Doc. No. 2]. Mr. Elliott alleges that he was wrongfully arrested for a state criminal charge and that he has been unlawfully detained. Mr. Elliott’s claims must be dismissed. Any part of a complaint that raises a claim that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from paying money damages must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). First, in order to state a claim for relief under § 1983, Mr. Elliott must allege that a person acting under the color of state law deprived him of some constitutional right. Here, Elliott names as a defendant Andre Crump. Because Andre Crump is a private citizen and not a state actor, Elliott’s claims against Crump fail. In addition, federal courts generally abstain from hearing cases, like this one, where there is an ongoing state judicial proceeding that implicates important state interests, and where the state proceeding affords an adequate opportunity to raise federal questions. Norwood v. Dickey, 409 F.3d 901, 903 (8th Cir. 2005); see also Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 59 (1971). Because Mr. Elliott has not stated a federal claim for relief, this case is dismissed without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of June 2013. _______________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?