Lewis v. Knox
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 8 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby Dismissed. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on October 7, 2013. (mll)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
DON EARL LEWIS
CIVIL NO. 4:12-cv-4140
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed June 12, 2013, by the
Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
(ECF No. 8). Judge Bryant recommends that Plaintiff Don Earl Lewis’s (“Lewis”) Complaint be
dismissed. On July 1, 2013, Lewis filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. (ECF
No. 9). After reviewing the record de novo, the Court adopts Judge Bryant’s Report and
Recommendation as its own.
This case involves civil rights claims brought by Lewis pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The claims arise from criminal charges filed against Lewis for sexual assault. Specifically,
Lewis alleges that: (1) Defendant Tracy Knox (“Knox”) violated his constitutional rights when
Knox reported her medical examination findings of Lewis’s alleged victim to a deputy; and (2)
Knox violated his constitutional rights by testifying against him. Judge Bryant reviewed Lewis’s
complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court must review the
Complaint to determine if the Complaint: (1) is frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
As to the claim relating to the medical examination, Judge Bryant concluded that Lewis
failed to state a violation of his constitutional rights because any right to privacy belonged to the
victim, not Lewis. “[A] plaintiff may only assert his own injury in fact and cannot rest his claim
to relief on the legal rights or interest of third parties.” Hodak v. City of St. Peters, 585 F.3d 899,
902 (8th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, in this case, Lewis cannot assert claim for violations of his
Therefore, Judge Bryant properly recommended that Lewis’s claim be
As to the allegations relating to Knox’s testimony, Judge Bryant concluded that the claim
was not ripe for adjudication because Knox was listed as a potential witness and had not actually
testified against Lewis. In his objections to the Report and Recommendation, Lewis informed
the Court that he accepted a plea agreement for the criminal charges. He has not informed the
Court of a proceeding where Knox testified against him. Because the Court is not aware of any
proceeding where Knox has testified or may testify in the future, Lewis’s claim regarding her
testimony does not present a live controversy. The claim should therefore be dismissed.
The Court therefore overrules Lewis’s objections and adopts Judge Bryant’s Report and
Recommendation in full. For the reasons stated herein, as well as those contained in the Report
and Recommendation, Plaintiff’s Complaint is hereby DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 7th day of October, 2013.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
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?