Pitchford v. Boeckmann et al

Filing 4

ORDER granting 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Pitchford's complaint will be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/7/2017. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

FREDERICK L. PITCHFORD
v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 3:17-cv-118-DPM

JOSEPH BOECKMANN; FRED
THORNE; DAVID HENRY
LOFTON; and JERRY EAVES

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

1. Pitchford' s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, Ng 1, is granted. He

doesn't have any income and has very few assets.
2. The CourtmustscreenPitchford's complaint. 28U.S.C.§1915(e)(2).

He is troubled by how some criminal charges he pressed against Shawonia
Jones were handled in the Crittenden County District Court. Pitchford's
claims can't go forward, though, for various reasons. First, the two judges
involved are absolutely immune from liability for acts taken within their
jurisdiction, no matter how mistaken those acts may have been. Robinson v.

Freeze, 15 F.3d 107, 108 (8th Cir. 1994); Duty v. City of Springdale, Arkansas, 42
F.3d 460, 463 (8th Cir. 1994). That resolves the allegations about Judge
Boeckmann and probably those about Judge Thorne. Second, the prosecutor
is entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for his part in the case. Sample v. City of

Woodbury, 836 F.3d 913, 916 (8th Cir. 2016). Third, Pitchford hasn't pleaded

any facts about what Earle police officer Jerry Eaves did wrong, so no claim
has been stated as to him. Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004).
Last, all the circumstances Pitchford has complained about do not equal a due
process violation; assuming it's all true, the facts show imperfection and
tangles, not some effort to corrupt the court system. Compare Caperton v. A. T.
Massey Coal Company, Inc., 556 U.S. 868, 876-77 (2009). Pitchford' s complaint

will therefore be dismissed without prejudice.
So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
7

-2-

~e ~Dl7