Strader (ID 66677) v. Werholtz et al
Filing
61
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: This matter is dismissed for failure to state a claim for relief. Plaintiff's motions for order (Docs. 5, 18, 29, 32, 33, 34, 39, 40, 41, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 53, and 55), motion for leave to file all pleading s conventionally (Doc. 13), motion for hearing and notice (Doc. 20), motions to amend (Doc. 30, 31, and 42), motion to the court (Doc. 51), motion for clarification and to vacate (Doc. 54), motion of crimes by defendants on state and federal level s (Doc. 56) and motion for order of restraint (Doc. 57) are denied. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 15) is granted. Collection action shall commence under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) and shall continue until plaint iff satisfies the $350.00 filing fee. A copy of this order shall be transmitted to the finance office of the facility where plaintiff is incarcerated. Signed by U.S. Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 10/4/2019. Mailed to pro se party James C. Strader by regular mail. (jal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
JAMES C. STRADER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASE NO. 19-3102-SAC
ROGER WERHOLTZ, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is a civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
by a prisoner in state custody. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma
pauperis.
Background
On June 14, 2019, the Court directed plaintiff to submit an
amended complaint that complies with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, which requires that a complaint present a short and
plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, a short
and plain statement of the claim showing that the plaintiff is entitled
to relief, and a demand for the relief sought. The order also advised
the plaintiff that his request for criminal charges against a
defendant or defendants could not be ordered by the court, and that,
to the extent he sought relief from incarceration, he must proceed
in habeas corpus.
Since that order was entered, plaintiff has filed 55 pleadings,
which includes two amended complaints (Docs. 7 and 9), a second amended
complaint (Doc. 14), two supplements to the second amended complaint
(Docs. 27 and 28), three motions to amend the second amended complaint
(Docs. 30, 31, and 42), and other motions, notices, and letters to
the Court.
Discussion
The United States Supreme Court has directed the federal courts
to hold pleadings filed by pro se litigants “to less stringent
standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Haines v. Kerner,
404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). This pleading standard, however, does not
relieve a pro se party from presenting sufficient facts to state a
claim for relief, nor does it allow the reviewing court to act as an
advocate for the pro se party. Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110
& n. 3 (10th Cir. 1991).
The Court has carefully reviewed the hundreds of pages of
materials submitted by the plaintiff and concludes that he has not
stated a claim for relief.
First, to the extent his claims may be read to allege that unnamed
detectives caused him to be wrongfully convicted, his claims for
monetary damages are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994).
In that case, the United States Supreme Court held that damages for
an allegedly unconstitutional conviction are not available in an
action brought under § 1983 unless the conviction has been reversed,
expunged, declared invalid by a state court, or undermined by a grant
of federal habeas corpus relief. Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87. Plaintiff
does not make the necessary showing, and the Court concludes he has
not stated a claim for relief.
Second, the balance of plaintiff’s claims appear to be legally
frivolous. His pleadings do not comply with Rule 8, and they address
a wide variety of topics that appear to be unrelated. He also continues
to seek the initiation of criminal charges, despite the Court’s
earlier order that explained that such charges must be filed by
prosecuting officials. The Court concludes that plaintiff has not
stated a viable claim for relief and will dismiss this matter on that
ground.
IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED this matter is dismissed
for failure to state a claim for relief.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff’s motions for order (Docs. 5,
18, 29, 32, 33, 34, 39, 40, 41, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 53, and 55),
motion for leave to file all pleadings conventionally (Doc. 13),
motion for hearing and notice (Doc. 20), motions to amend (Doc. 30,
31, and 42), motion to the court (Doc. 51), motion for clarification
and to vacate (Doc. 54), motion of crimes by defendants on state and
federal levels (Doc. 56) and motion for order of restraint (Doc. 57)
are denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis (Doc. 15) is granted. Collection action shall
commence under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) and shall continue until plaintiff
satisfies the $350.00 filing fee. A copy of this order shall be
transmitted to the finance office of the facility where plaintiff is
incarcerated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
This 4th day of October, 2019, at Topeka, Kansas.
S/ Sam A. Crow
SAM A. CROW
U.S. Senior District Judge
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?