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)

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