Gordon v. P.S.I. et al
MEMORANDUM, OPINION and ORDER DISMISSING CASE as FRIVOLOUS signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 2/10/2009. CASE CLOSED.(Lundstrom, T)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Defendants. 17 18 On January 13, 2009, Alpheous E. Gordon, proceeding in pro 19 per, filed a Complaint against Defendants Jack C. Roberson and 20 James 21 false statements in Gordon's Presentence Investigation Report 22 submitted in connection with Gordon's sentencing on October 15, 23 2007 in United States v. Gordon, No. CR-F-07-029 OWW, United 24 States District Court for the Eastern District of California. 25 The Complaint seeks ten million dollars in damages. 26 1 E. Herbert, United States Probation Officers, for alleged P.S.I. OFFICERS OF DISTRICT COURT OF CAL. JACK C. ROBERSON AND JAMES E. HERBERT, vs. Plaintiff, ALPHEOUS E. GORDON, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-F-09-228 OWW MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AS FRIVOLOUS AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Dated: 668554
The Court has authority to dismiss a complaint before issuance and service of process upon the Defendants as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). A frivolous claim is one which lacks Federal probation
an arguable basis in either law or fact.
officers allegedly making false statements in a probation report are entitled to absolute judicial immunity from liability for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 136-139 (2nd Cir.1987). For the reasons stated: 1. 2. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED as frivolous; The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter JUDGMENT FOR Dorman v. Higgins, 821 F.2d 133,
DEFENDANTS. IT IS SO ORDERED. February 10, 2009 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 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?