Terrell v. Owens et al

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING 14 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The Plaintiff's Motions 9 and 12 are dismissed as moot. The Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed w/out prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 9/27/2012. (ca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GE9Q1
tP 27 jçq ii
WAYCROSS DIVISION

I

CL E
:

WILLIE JAMES TERRELL, JR.,

SO.

Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV512-030

V.

BRIAN OWENS; CO SHATTUCKER;
SAMUEL OLENS; CO II Sgt. KIRKLAND;
Lt. ADAMS; Lt. DYRAL COLLIER;
FNU PINEIRO; Lt. REYNOLDS;
Miss FERRA, P.A.; RON FREEMAN;
STATE OF GEORGIA; Dr. FERRELL;
Capt. BROOKS; LULIA BEARD;
SHIRLEY THOMAS; TED PHILBAN;
ARTIS SINGLETON; TERRY WILSON;
and WARD DARRELL HART,
Defendants.

ORDER

United States Magistrate Judge James E. Graham entered a Report on June 11,
2012, and recommended that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed, without prejudice,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Magistrate Judge Graham noted that, if Plaintiff
desired to proceed with his cause of action, he could resubmit his Complaint along with
the full filing fee. (Doc. No. 14). In response, Plaintiff filed Objections to this Report and
sought leave to amend his Complaint. Magistrate Judge Graham granted Plaintiffs
request by Order dated July 16, 2012. (Doc. No. 17). Since that time, Plaintiff has
inundated the Court with filings in this cause of action. Included in Plaintiffs filings are
copies of Standard Operating Procedures concerning inmate mail and receipt of funds,

AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

access to courts, and legal access for residents in transitional centers. (Doc. No. 18).
Plaintiff also included a copy of the Standard Operating Procedure regarding the Prison
Rape Elimination Act. (Doc. No. 19). These filings do not support an assertion that
Plaintiff was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time he filed his
Complaint.
Plaintiff also filed a pleading entitled "Injunction and Restraining Order: Motion".
(Doc. No. 20). A review of this pleading does not indicate to the undersigned that the
assertions set forth in that pleading are applicable to Plaintiff in any way, and, even if
the assertions are, they are irrelevant to the events detailed in Plaintiffs Complaint.
Plaintiff also filed a pleading entitled "Injunction and Protection Order: Motion". (Doc.
No. 21). Plaintiff also filed two (2) identical pleadings, which are also entitled
"Injunction and Restraining Order: Motion". (Doc. Nos. 22, 23). In addition, Plaintiff filed
an Emergency Motion for Injunction and Temporary Protective Order. (Doc. No. 24).
Just four (4) days later, Plaintiff filed an amendment to his Emergency Motion. (Dcc.
No. 28). Based on the undersigned's disposition of Plaintiffs cause of action, these
Motions are DENIED.
In his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff states that he was sexually assaulted by a
Fulton County Sheriffs Deputy in 2007. Plaintiff also mentions events occurring in July
2010 and in May through August 2011. Plaintiff makes allegations against Defendant
Shattuck, and these allegations detail events occurring on February 10-12, February 29,
and March 12-14, 2012. (Doc. No. 25, p. 4, 8). Plaintiff asserts in his Objections that
he was injured as a result of Defendant Shattuck's February 10, 2012, assault. Plaintiff

OA
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

also asserts that he was interrogated about this assault more than a month later. (Doc.
No. 16, p. 2).
Despite the many opportunities Plaintiff has taken to show that he was in
imminent danger of serious physical injury on April 12, 2012, the date he filed his
Complaint, Plaintiff has failed to do so. Plaintiff has not met the exception to section
1915(g) so as to allow him to proceed with this cause of action at this time. The
undersigned offers no opinion as the relative merits of the allegations Plaintiff makes in
his Complaint, as supplemented and amended. However, the undersigned notes that
Plaintiff, cannot proceed with this cause of action on an in forma pauperis basis.
Plaintiffs Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiffs Complaint is
DISMISSED, without prejudice. Should Plaintiff wish to pursue his allegations

stemming from events allegedly occurring in February and March of 2012, he may
resubmit his complaint along with the full filing fee. Plaintiffs Motion to Consolidate is
DISMISSED as moot. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the appropriate judgment

of dismissal.
SO ORDERED, this

'4/\__, (7(

L1 day of

LI

,2012.

LISA ?ODBEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

3