Chandler v. Arkansas, State of

Filing 3

ORDER denying 1 Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; dismissing Plaintiff's cause of action with prejudice; and, directing the Clerk to close this case. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 7/26/2012. (dmn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
DUSTIN CHANDLER
ADC #138825
V.

PLAINTIFF
4:12CV00419 JMM

STATE OF ARKANSAS

DEFENDANT
ORDER

Pending before this Court is the Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. The In
Forma Pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, is designed to ensure “that indigent persons will have
equal access to the judicial system.” Greaser v. State of Mo., Dep’t of Corrections, 145 F.3d
979, 985 (8th Cir. 1998). The decision of whether to grant or deny in forma pauperis status under
section 1915 “is within the sound discretion of the trial court.” Cross v. General Motors Corp.,
721 F.2d 1152, 1157 (8th Cir. 1983). Further, a district court must dismiss the case at any time if
the court determines that the action is frivolous, malicious or fails to state a claim on which relief
may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
In this case, Plaintiff seeks to appeal from the final Order of the Supreme Court of
Arkansas dated May 31, 2012. (ECF No. 2). Federal district courts have no authority to review
the final determinations of a state court. Review of such determinations is only available in the
United States Supreme Court on direct appeal or by writ of certiorari. This principle has been
well established since 1923, when in Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68
L.Ed. 362 (1923), the Supreme Court held:
Under the legislation of Congress, no court of the United States other than this court
could entertain a proceeding to reverse or modify the judgment [of a state's highest court
that decided federal constitutional issues]. To do so would be an exercise of appellate
jurisdiction. The jurisdiction possessed by the District Courts is strictly original.

Id. at 416, 44 S.Ct. at 150 (citations omitted). Therefore, Plaintiff’s Complaint must be
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Docket # 1) is
DENIED. Plaintiff’s cause of action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to
close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 26th day of July, 2012.

______________________________
James M. Moody
United States District Judge