Fawley v. Warden

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Alexander Williams, Jr on 3/9/2012. (c/m 3/9/12 rs) (rss, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

JOHN FAWLEY

*
Plaintiff,

v.
WARDEN (VISA TO RUSSIA)
Defendant.

*

CIVIL ACTION NO. AW-12-692

*
***

MEMORANDUM

On March 5, 2012, the Court received the instant self-represented Complaint, accompanied
by an indigency application. Plaintiff, who is confined in the Eastern Correctional Institution in
Westover, Maryland, does not directly raise any specific claims except to state he was not guilty of
any criminal offenses in either North Carolina or Maryland.1 In sum, he wishes to exchange his
“independence” in the United States with that of any Russian who wishes to come to America.
(ECF No. 1). He also asks to be provided a visa and “one-way ticket” to Russia along with a snow
suit.2 The Complaint makes a number of statements, all of which appear fanciful on their face.
Allegations in a self-represented complaint are to be liberally construed, and a court should
not dismiss an action for the failure to state a claim “unless after accepting all well-pleaded
allegations in the plaintiff's complaint as true and drawing all reasonable factual inferences from
those facts in the plaintiff's favor, it appears certain that the plaintiff cannot prove any set of facts in

1
Given Plaintiff’s extraneous comments regarding Judge Bragunier, it is believed that he was
convicted of various offenses in the Circuit Court for Charles County in 2004 and sentenced to a cumulative
20-year term. See Maryland v. Fawley, Criminal No. 08K03000729 (Cir. Ct for Charles County).
2
Plaintiff expresses his disenchantment with his custodial situation, complaining that he has
been denied sheets, a bowl, and “thermos bottoms.” (ECF No. 1). He does not explain how he was injured
by such denial.

support of his claim entitling him to relief.” De'Lonta v. Angelone, 330 F.3d 630, 633 (4th Cir. 2003)
(quoting Veney v. Wyche, 293 F.3d 726, 730 (4th Cir. 2002)). Courts are instructed that selfrepresented filings “however unskillfully pleaded, must be liberally construed.” Noble v. Barnett, 24
F.3d 582, 587 n. 6 (4th Cir. 1994) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972); Vinnedge v. Gibbs,
550 F.2d 926, 928 (4th Cir. 1977)). However, the complaint must contain sufficient facts “to raise a
right to relief above the speculative level” and “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). A claim having no arguable basis in law or
fact may be dismissed as frivolous. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see also 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), (outlining screening process for indigent or prisoner complaints).
Examples of frivolous claims include those whose factual allegations are “so nutty,”
“delusional,” or “wholly fanciful” as to be simply unbelievable. See Gladney v. Pendelton Corr.
Facility, 302 F.3d. 773, 774 (7th Cir. 2002); See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 29 (1992).
Plaintiff’s claims plainly fall into this category of allegations.

The Complaint is replete with

fantastic assertions which speak for themselves. Therefore, while his Motion to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis shall be granted, his action shall be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). This
constitutes the second § 1915(e) dismissal to be charged to Plaintiff.3 He is hereby notified that he
may be barred from filing future suits in forma pauperis if he continues to file federal civil rights
actions that are subject to dismissal under § 1915(e) because they are deemed frivolous or malicious

3
Plaintiff has accumulated one prior strike under § 1915(e). See Fawley v. Fawley, Civil
Action No. AW-05-2596 (D. Md.).

2

or because they fail to state a claim for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).4 A
separate Order follows reflecting the opinion set out herein.

Date: March 9, 2012.

4

/s/
Alexander Williams Jr.
United States District Judge

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) states that:
In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a
civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or
more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought
an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the
grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of
serious physical injury.
Once three such dismissals under § 1915(e) or Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure have been accumulated, a prisoner will be barred from initiating further civil
actions in forma pauperis, absent extraordinary circumstances.

3