Konrath v. Sands
Filing
7
OPINION AND ORDER: The court DISMISSES this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(iii) because Christian Sands has prosecutorial immunity. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 8/17/2016. (lhc)(cc: Plaintiff)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
GREGORY A. KONRATH,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
vs.
CHRISTIAN SANDS,
Defendant.
CAUSE NO. 3:16-CV-520
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the complaint filed by
Plaintiff, Gregory A. Konrath, a pro se prisoner, on August 8,
2016. (DE 1.) For the reasons set forth below, the court DISMISSES
this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii) because
Christian Sands has prosecutorial immunity.
DISCUSSION
In this case, Konrath sues Christian Sands, a Miami County
prosecuting attorney. Konrath alleges this prosecutor “violated
[his] rights by filing a affidavit of probable cause for attempted
murder on July 8, 2016, in Miami County Circuit Court, that had
insufficient evidence to establish probable cause for attempted
murder
in
Miami
County.”
(DE
1
at
2.)
In
addition,
Konrath
complains that Sands prosecuted him in a different county from
where the alleged murder attempt occurred. Konrath seeks money
damages against the deputy prosecutor for these actions.
Konrath
cannot
recover
prosecutor in this case.
money
damages
against
the
deputy
“[I]n initiating a prosecution and in
presenting the State’s case, the prosecutor is immune from a civil
suit for damages under § 1983.” Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409,
431 (1976). “Absolute immunity shields prosecutors even if they act
maliciously, unreasonably, without probable cause, or even on the
basis of false testimony or evidence.” Cooper v. Parrish, 203 F.3d
937, 947 (6th Cir. 2000) (quotation marks and citation omitted).
Filing probable cause affidavits and requesting to change
venue
during trial are both part of the presenting of the State’s case.
Accordingly, deputy prosecutor Christian Sands is immune from suit.
Though it is usually necessary to permit a plaintiff the
opportunity to file an amended complaint when a case is dismissed
sua sponte, see Luevano v. Wal-Mart, 722 F.3d 1014 (7th Cir. 2013),
that is unnecessary where the amendment would be futile. Hukic v.
Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 432 (7th Cir. 2009) (“[C]ourts
have broad discretion to deny leave to amend where . . . the
amendment would be futile.”) Such is the case here because no
amendment could cure the fact that Konrath cannot obtain any relief
in
a
lawsuit
against
this
Miami
County
deputy
prosecutor.
Therefore this case must be dismissed.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the court DISMISSES this case
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii) because Christian Sands
has prosecutorial immunity.
DATED: August 17, 2016
/s/RUDY LOZANO, Judge
United States District Court
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?