Thomas v. Stewart et al

Filing 15

JUDGMENT adopting 13 Report and Recommendations, dismissing Plaintiff's civil rights claims seeking monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory relief with prejudice as frivolous under 28 USC Sec 1915(e) until such time as the Heck condit ions are met. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's civil rights claims against District Attorney James C Stewart, the Caddo Parish District Attorney's Office and Assistant District Attorneys Dale G Cox, Dhu Thompson and Holly McGinnes be dismis sed with prejudice as frivolous under 28 USC Sec 1915(e). FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for habeas relief be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies. Signed by Chief Judge S Maurice Hicks, Jr on 5/29/2018. (crt,McDonnell, D)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION
DEMARIO THOMAS

CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-1218-P

VERSUS

JUDGE S. MAURICE HICKS, JR.

JAMES C. STEWART, ET AL.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY
JUDGMENT

For the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge
previously filed herein(Record Document 13), and after an independent review of the
record, including written objections filed by Plaintiff (Record Document 14) and
determining that the findings are correct under the applicable law;
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s civil rights claims seeking monetary damages and
injunctive and declaratory relief for his allegedly unconstitutional conviction and sentence
be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) until such time
as the Heck conditions are met. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s civil rights
claims against District Attorney James C. Stewart, the Caddo Parish District Attorney’s
Office, and Assistant District Attorneys Dale G. Cox, Dhu Thompson, and Holly McGinnes
be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

IT IS

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for habeas relief be DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust state court remedies.
Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings for the U.S. District
Courts requires the district court to issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it
enters a final order adverse to the applicant. The court, after considering the record in
this case and the standard set forth in 28 U.S.C. Section 2253, denies a certificate of

appealability because the applicant has not made a substantial showing of the denial of
a constitutional right.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 29th day of May, 2018.