Nixon v. Hunter et al

Filing 4

ORDER directing Nixon to file on or before 10/21/2016 an amended complaint explaining how each of the defendants violated his constitutional rights, and how he was personally harmed by each alleged constitutional violation. Nixon must clarify whether his arrest resulted in the filing of criminal charges, and if so, the status of those criminal charges. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 9/21/2016. (jak)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

RONNIE NIXON, JR.
V.

PLAINTIFF
No. 3:16CV00249 JLH

RON HUNTER, Judge, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Ronnie Nixon, Jr. is confined in the Poinsett County Detention Center. He has filed a
pro se § 1983 complaint alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires federal courts to screen complaints filed by
prisoners. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or a portion thereof if the
prisoner has raised claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, fail to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
Nixon and Michael Hisaw signed one complaint alleging that their constitutional rights have
been violated. Document #2. The Clerk of this Court severed the complaint into two separate
lawsuits. As the complaint currently stands, it is impossible to determine which constitutional
claims belong to Nixon, and how he was personally harmed by each alleged constitutional violation.
The Court must have that information to complete § 1915A screening.
Therefore, Nixon must file, on or before October 21, 2016, an amended complaint
explaining how each of the defendants violated his constitutional rights, and how he was personally
harmed by each alleged constitutional violation. Additionally, Nixon must clarify whether his arrest
resulted in the filing of criminal charges, and if so, the status of those criminal charges. If Nixon
does not timely and properly file his amended complaint, this case will be dismissed without

-1-

prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of September, 2016.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-