Ferriel v. Hobbs et al
ORDER adopting Judge Ray's recommended disposition with clarifications; and dismissing Ferriel's complaint as amended without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/21/11. (hph)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
THOMAS MARVIN FERRIEL, II
Case No. 5:10-cv-325-DPM
RAY HOBBS, GRANT E. HARRIS,
MARK CASHION, RONALD GANA,
JOHNNIE HARRIS, SHAMON TYLER,
C. LAGRONE, ANGELA LEWIS,
TERESA WILLIAMS, P. SMITH, FORD,
and L. HICKS
The Court has carefully reviewed Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray's
Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition, Document No. 18, and
Thomas FerrieI's objections, Document No.2 7. After de novo review, the Court
adopts Judge Ray's recommended disposition as its own with clarifications
mostly prompted by FerrieI's objections. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). First, the
Court grants FerrieI's request to abandon his Fifth and Sixth Amendment
claims; and they are resolved on that basis. Second, the facts alleged - even
as amplified a bit in the objections - simply do not state Due Process or Eighth
Amendment claims. Third, the Court does not adopt the citation to the older
unpublished opinions in Sanders and Driscoll.
FerrieI's complaint as amended, Document Nos. 2-1, 16, & 17, is
dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. This dismissal counts
as a "strike" for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies that an
in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment
would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
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?