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)

Download PDF
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.ยง1915(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

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?