Zamora v. Richardson et al

Filing 3

ORDER of DISMISSAL. This miscellaneous action is dismissed. Court lacks jurisdiction over the Motion for Review by Appallette, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 1/18/12. (gmssl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-mc-00003-LTB
LOUIS ZAMORA, Injured Worker,
LOUIS MICHAEL ZAMORA, Executor Office,
LOUIS MICHAEL ZAMORA, Estate & Heirs,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
BILL RICHARDSON, Former New Mexico Governor,
SUSANA MARTINEZ, Current New Mexico Governor,
THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Principals, Officers, Agents,
WORKERS COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATION, WCA New Mexico,
SHARON GENTRY, Office of General Counsel WCA,
DARRIN CHILDERS, Office of General Counsel WCA,
GLENN R. SMITH, Former Director WCA,
NED FULLER, Current Director WCA,
LAURA FEIGHT, Deputy Director of Judges WCA,
ELAINE TRUJILLO, Deputy Director of Judges WCA,
LORI A. MARTINEZ, Office of Judge WCA,
SHANNON RILEY, Office of Judge WCA,
CHAD C. DEATON, CEO Baker Hughes/BJ Services Principals, Officers, Agents,
PETER A. RAGAUSS, CFO Baker/Hughes BJ Services,
FRED COSSUM, BJ Services/Baker Hughes Farmington New Mexico,
TERESSA SERNA, & Crawford & Co. Principals, Officers, Agents,
GRACE BACA, & Crawford & Company Principals, Officers, Agents,
KAREN A. MEYER, Ing/ReliaStar Life/Compliance,
SUE SANTA, Ing/ReliaStar Life Principals, Officers, Agents,
ARTHUR KUPER, Health One Occptational [sic] Medicine & Rehabilitation At North
Suburban Principals, Officers, Agents,
TIMOTHY S. HALE, Hale & Dixon Attorneys,
PAULETTE J. DIXON, Hale & Dixon Attorneys,
RELIANCE MEDICAL GROUP, Farmington, New Mexico Principals, Officers, Agents,
and,
BOB R. SIMPSON, XTO Energy, Inc. Principals, Officers, Agents,
Defendants.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Mr. Zamora initiated this action by filing a “Criminal Complaint” with the Court on
January 11, 2012 against numerous defendants. He also filed a “Motion for Review by
Appallette [sic]” (Doc. No. 2).
The Court must construe Mr. Zamora’s filings liberally because he is representing
himself. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d
1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). However, the Court should not be the pro se litigant’s
advocate. Hall, 935 F.2d at 1110. For the reasons stated below, this miscellaneous
criminal action will be dismissed.
“A private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or
nonprosecution of another.” Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973). See
also Keyter v. 535 Members of 110th Congress, 277 F. App’x. 825, 827 (10th Cir.
2008); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Connecticut Action
Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co., 457 F.2d 81, 86-87 (2d Cir. 1972) (“It is a truism, and
has been for many decades, that in our federal system crimes are always prosecuted by
the Federal Government, not as has sometimes been done in Anglo-American
jurisdictions by private complaints.”); Winslow v. Romer, 759 F. Supp. 670, 673 (D.
Colo. 1991) (“Private citizens generally have no standing to institute federal criminal
proceedings.”). Therefore, the Court finds that Mr. Zamora lacks standing to invoke the
authority of United States attorneys under 28 U.S.C. § 547 to prosecute for offenses
against the United States.
Furthermore, Mr. Zamora’s “Motion for Review by Appallette [sic]” appears to be
barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. See D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460
U.S. 462, 486 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 415-16 (1923). In his

motion, Mr. Zamora asserts that the “lower inferior court failed to create a remedy that
was expeditions” and he appears to be challenging a state worker’s compensation
proceeding. Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, the lower federal courts may not
review the judgments of state courts. Id. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that this miscellaneous criminal action is dismissed because Mr.
Zamora lacks standing to file a criminal action. Furthermore, the federal district court
lacks jurisdiction over the “Motion for Review by Appallette [sic]” pursuant to the
Rooker-Feldman doctrine.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 18th

day of

January

, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court

3