Young et al v. Scott et al
Filing
20
MERIT REVIEW OPINION entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 2/28/2017. The Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint by Plaintiffs Young, Taylor, Hines, Smith, McQueen and Douglas is granted, d/e 15 . Plaintiffs Jerry Harris and Darius Wilson a re dismissed because they did not sign the Amended Complaint. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE because Defendants are immune from lawsuits for damages based on Defendants' actions taken in court in Plaintiffs' criminal proceedings. Plaintiffs Young, Douglas, Smith, Taylor, Hines and McQueen are each still responsible for payment of the full filing fee of $350.00 even though this case has been dismissed. The pending motion by Jerry Harris is denied as moot, d/e 14 . If a Plaintiff wishes to appeal this dismissal, he must file a notice of appeal with this Court within 30 days of the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). If a Plaintiff does choose to appeal, he will be liable for the $505 appellate filing fee irrespective of the outcome of the appeal. Case CLOSED. (SEE WRITTEN MERIT REVIEW OPINION) (MAS, ilcd)
E-FILED
Tuesday, 28 February, 2017 10:44:36 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
TELLY C. YOUNG, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
MACON COUNTY
STATE’S ATTORNEY
JAY SCOTT AND JUDGE
JEFFREY GEISLER,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
16-CV-2289
MERIT REVIEW OPINION
Plaintiffs filed this case pro se from their detention in the
Macon County Jail. Their amended complaint is before the Court
for a merit review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.1 This statute
requires the Court to review a complaint filed by a prisoner or
detainee to identify the cognizable claims and to dismiss part or all
of the complaint if no claim is stated, or if the action “seeks
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.”
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(2).
In reviewing the Complaint, the Court accepts the factual
allegations as true, liberally construing them in Plaintiff's favor.
1
A prisoner who has had three prior actions dismissed for failure to state a claim or as frivolous or malicious can
no longer proceed in forma pauperis (without prepaying the filing fee in full) unless the prisoner is under
“imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Page 1 of 7
Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649 (7th Cir. 2013). However,
conclusory statements and labels are insufficient. Enough facts
must be provided to "'state a claim for relief that is plausible on its
face.'" Alexander v. U.S., 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013)(quoted
cite omitted).
Plaintiffs allege that Macon County State’s Attorney Jay Scott
and Judge Giesler, a Macon County Associate Judge, collude to
deprive detainees of their constitutional rights by setting excessive
bail for detainees based on the detainees’ race and that the
excessive bails cause indigent, uneducated detainees to plead guilty
in order to secure their sooner release. They also allege that Judge
Geisler routinely finds probable cause for detention when no
probable cause exists and allows State’s Attorney Scott to introduce
false evidence in the probable cause hearings. Further, Plaintiffs
allege that Defendants conspire to allow detainees with connections
to the Sheriff or the Sheriff’s employees to be released on reduced
bonds. Plaintiffs each ask for $100,000 in compensatory damages,
$5,000 in punitive damages, and for both Defendants to “be
reported to Bar association.”
Page 2 of 7
Plaintiffs give no specifics as to their own criminal
proceedings. They do allege that a plaintiff in the original
complaint, Damarius Wilson,2 a black male, had his bond set at
$21,000, while a white male, Brock McQueen, had bond set at
$20,000 for a similar offense.
Plaintiffs cannot pursue this action for damages because both
Defendants are immune from lawsuits for damages based on their
actions in court. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 431
(1976)("[I]n initiating a prosecution and in presenting the State's
case, the prosecutor is immune from a civil suit for damages under
section 1983."); Polzin v. Gage, 636 F.3d 834, 838 (7th Cir. 2011)(
“A judge has absolute immunity for any judicial actions unless the
judge acted in the absence of all jurisdiction.”). Probable cause and
bond proceedings in court are clearly judicial or prosecutorial
actions protected by immunity. See Smith v. Power, 346 F.3d 740
(7th Cir. 2003)(“absolute immunity shields prosecutors even if they
act ‘maliciously, unreasonably, without probable cause, or even on
the basis of false testimony or evidence.’’’)(quoted cite omitted); Ford
v. Sessoms, 2016 WL 126388 (N.D. Ind.)(dismissing on judicial
2
Damarius Wilson did not sign the amended complaint.
Page 3 of 7
immunity grounds detainee’s claim that excessive bond was
imposed based on detainee’s race); Miller v. Williamson County,
2014 WL 1613308 *4 (S.D. Ill.)(“Plaintiff cannot maintain a civil
rights suit against the judge who set his allegedly excessive bail,
because judges, being sued solely for judicial acts, are protected by
absolute judicial immunity.”); Shepard v. Mikulich, 2010 WL
2719107 (N.D. Ind.)(unpublished)(Judge in individual capacity
immune from lawsuit alleging that she “used racial profiling to
triple his bond”).
If Plaintiffs believe they are being held without probable cause
or their bond is too high, Plaintiffs’ legal recourse is to file an
appropriate motion in their pending criminal cases, appeal the
decision through the state courts, and then, possibly file a federal
habeas action. See U.S. ex rel. Garcia v. O’Grady, 812 F.2d 347
(7th Cir. 1987)(example of exhausting state court remedies and
then pursuing an excessive bail claim through federal habeas
petition).
The Court also notes, in regards to Plaintiffs’ claim of racial
profiling, that Damarius Wilson, a black detainee, was released on a
recognizance bond, and therefore did not have to post bond.
Page 4 of 7
2016cf968 (Macon County)(www.judici.com). In comparison, Brock
McQueen, a white detainee, had to post bond and then the bond
posted was revoked. 2015cf1597 (Macon County)(www.judici.com).
Wilson was sentenced to probation; McQueen was sentenced to jail
time. Id. No inference of racial discrimination against black
detainees arises from these facts.
IT IS ORDERED:
1)
The motion for leave to file an amended complaint by
Plaintiffs Young, Taylor, Hines, Smith, McQueen, and Douglas is
granted [15].
2)
Plaintiff Jerry Harris is dismissed because he did not sign
the amended complaint.
3)
Plaintiff Darius Wilson is dismissed because he did not
sign the amended complaint.
4)
Plaintiffs’ amended complaint is dismissed with prejudice
because Defendants are immune from lawsuits for damages based
on Defendants’ actions taken in court in Plaintiffs’ criminal
Page 5 of 7
proceedings. Any amendment against these Defendants based on
their actions in court would be futile.
5)
The following Plaintiffs who signed the amended
complaint must each still pay the full filing fee of $350 even though
this case has been dismissed: Telly Young, Avers Douglas, James
Smith, Jamie Taylor, Jeremy Hines, and Brock McQueen.
Boriboune v. Berge, 391 F.3d 852, 856 (7th Cir. 2004)(each
prisoner-plaintiff in civil action must be assessed separate filing
fees).
6)
The pending motion by Jerry Harris is denied as moot
7)
If a Plaintiff wishes to appeal this dismissal, he must file
[14].
a notice of appeal with this Court within 30 days of the entry of
judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). A motion for leave to appeal in
forma pauperis should set forth the issues Plaintiff plans to present
on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1)(C). If a Plaintiff does choose
to appeal, he will be liable for the $505 appellate filing fee
irrespective of the outcome of the appeal.
Page 6 of 7
9)
The clerk is directed to terminate Plaintiffs Harris
and Wilson.
10) If not already done, the clerk is directed to enter the
standard text order assessing and collecting the filing fee for
Plaintiffs Telly Young, Avers Douglas, James Smith, Jamie
Taylor, Jeremy Hines, and Brock McQueen, using the trust
fund ledgers that are available from the Macon County Jail.
Released Plaintiffs may file an updated petition to proceed in
forma pauperis by March 17, if they seek a waiver of the filing
fee based on their current income and assets.
11) The clerk is directed to close this case.
ENTERED: February 28, 2017
FOR THE COURT:
s/Sue E. Myerscough
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 7 of 7
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?