Conway v. Oliver et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 9 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in toto, and plaintiff's claims against Steven D. Oliver (District Attorney), Joe Graham (D.A. Assistant) and J. Blake Hendrix (Public Defender) are dismissed without prejudice; further service will be ordered against defendants Norris and Lampinen in a separate Order. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on June 27, 2016. (rw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION DETRIC CONWAY v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 6:15-cv-6028 STEVEN D. OLIVER, District Attorney; PAUL NORRIS, Detective; SCOTT LAMPINEN, Detective; J. BLAKE HENDRIX, Public Defender; JOE GRAHAM, D.A. Assistant DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is the Amended Report and Recommendation filed by Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 9). Plaintiff has timely filed objections. (ECF No. 10). The Court finds this matter ripe for its consideration. Judge Bryant recommends a finding that the claims against Steven D. Oliver and Joe Graham be dismissed because they are immune from suit as prosecuting attorneys. He recommends that Plaintiff has failed to state a cognizable claim against J. Blake Hendrix. Judge Bryant recommends that the claims against Paul Norris and Scott Lampinen proceed. Defendant has filed timely objections, asserting that absolute immunity is inapplicable to Oliver and Graham in this case. A prosecutor’s absolute immunity from a civil suit for damages is broad. See Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 431 (1976). “Even if [a prosecutor] knowingly presented false, misleading, or perjured testimony, or even if he withheld or suppressed exculpatory evidence, he is absolutely immune from [a §1983] suit.” Reasonover v. St. Louis County, Mo., 447 F.3d 569, 580 (8th Cir. 2006). Under the PLRA, Defendants are not required to come in and defend a civil suit if the Court finds that the Plaintiff’s causes of action seek monetary relief against a Defendant who is immune from such relief. Plaintiff’s allegations in his Complaint seek monetary relief from immune Defendants. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections are overruled. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 9) is adopted in toto. Plaintiff’s claims against Oliver, Hendrix, and Graham are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(I-iii) and 1915A(a). Service will be ordered against Defendants Norris and Lampinen in a separate Order. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 27th day of June, 2016. /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?