Starr v. Fort Wayne Police Dept et al

Filing 29

OPINION AND ORDER: this case is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Signed by Senior Judge James T Moody on 2/19/16. cc: Starr(mc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
CHANSE T. STARR,
Plaintiff,
v.
FORT WAYNE POLICE DEPT. et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:14 CV 236

OPINION and ORDER
Chanse T. Starr, a pro se prisoner, filed an amended complaint. (DE # 15.) He is
attempting to sue nine defendants for Fourth Amendment violations which occurred in
October 2011. Starr alleges that while he was hiding under a bed in a hotel room, police
officers illegally entered the room to execute a warrant for his arrest. He alleges that
they illegally seized him, property found in the room, his car, and property in the car.
“A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed, and a pro se complaint,
however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal
pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation
marks and citations omitted). Nevertheless, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the court
must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous
or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary
relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Although the statute of
limitations is an affirmative defense, dismissal is appropriate where the complaint

makes clear that the claims are time barred. Cancer Foundation, Inc. v. Cerberus Capital
Management, LP, 559 F.3d 671, 674 (7th Cir. 2009).
“Fourth Amendment claims for false arrest or unlawful searches accrue at the
time of (or termination of) the violation.” Dominguez v. Hendley, 545 F.3d 585, 589 (7th
Cir. 2008). These claims arose in October 2011. Indiana’s two-year limitations period for
personal injury suits applies to Section 1983 claims. Behavioral Inst. of Ind., LLC v. Hobart
City of Common Council, 406 F.3d 926, 929 (7th Cir. 2005). Therefore, the deadline for
filing this claim expired in October 2013. However, Starr did not sign the original
complaint filed in this case until July 20, 2014, (DE # 1 at 5), making this complaint
untimely. Because it is frivolous and malicious to bring this suit after the statute of
limitations expired, this case is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

SO ORDERED.

Date: February 19, 2016
s/ James T. Moody
JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT