Blankumsee v. Washington County, Maryland Office of States Attorney et al

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Paul W. Grimm on 04/15/2013. (bas, Deputy Clerk))(c/m on 4/16/13 bca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
AZANIAH BLANKUMSEE, # 326-698

*

*

*
*
*

Plaintiff,
v

Civil Action No. PWG-13-970

*
*

WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
OFFICE OF STATES ATTORNEY,
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
HAGERSTOWN POLICE DEPARTMENT

*

Defendant

*
*

*
*

***
MEMORANDUM
Azaniah Blimkumsee, an inmate at North Branch Conectional Institution, filed this civil
rights complaint under 42 U.S.C.

9

1983 on April 1, 2013, alleging that defendants unlawfully

charged and detained him in 2004 on charges of first-degree murder. As redress, he requests
compensatory and punitive damages. For the purpose of preliminary review, the court will grant
Blanksumsee leave to proceed in forma pauperis because he has neither provided the filing fee
nor submitted a motion to proceed as an indigent in this case.
After screening the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

SS

1915 and 1915A, the court finds

it subject to summary dismissal based on the United States Supreme Court's decision in Heck v.
Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). "[W]here success in a prisoner's

9

1983 damages action would

implicitly question the validity of conviction or duration of sentence, the litigant must first
achieve favorable termination of his available state, or federal habeas, opportunities to challenge
the underlying conviction or sentence." Muhammadv.

Close, 540 U.S. 749, 751 (2004) (citing

Heck 512 U.S. at 477). To recover damages for an allegedly unconstitutional conviction or
imprisonment or for other harm whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence

invalid, a

S

1983 plaintiff must demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on

direct appeal, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to
make such a determination, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

S 2254.

Blankumsee provides no evidence his conviction or

sentence were invalidated.
Mindful that plaintiff is self-represented, the court has liberally construed his pleading.
See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89,94 (2007); Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir.
1978). When a federal court is evaluating a pro se complaint, plaintiffs allegations are assumed
to be true. Erickson, 551 U.S. at 93 (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 55556, (2007)). Liberal construction does not mean, however, that a court can ignore a clear failure
in the pleading to allege facts which set forth a claim cognizable in a federal district court. See
Weller v. Department a/Social Services, 901 F.2d 387 (4th Cir. 1990); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009) (outlining pleading requirements under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure for "all civil actions"). Absent of any evidence the criminal conviction at
issue has been invalidated or reversed, the complaint shall

ismissed without prejudice by

separate order to follow.

Paul W. Grimm
United States District Judge

2