Watkins v. State of Michigan, People of et al
Filing
5
OPINION and ORDER Dismissing Complaint 1 Complaint, Signed by District Judge Laurie J. Michelson. (JJoh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
GARY WATKINS,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 15-12891
Honorable Laurie J. Michelson
v.
PEOPLE OF STATE OF MICHIGAN,
DONALD D. SHELTON, and
DONALD GOLDSTEIN,
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
DISMISSING COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)
Plaintiff Gary Watkins, a state inmate, is challenging his conviction in a separate habeas
corpus proceeding. See Watkins v. Romanowski, No. 2:10-cv-13199 (E.D. Mich. filed Aug. 12,
2010). This is a civil rights lawsuit in which the allegations are mostly nonsensical. In his pro se
complaint, Watkins avers:
I killed someone. I committed no crime. Lawful kill [with] permit. Wrongfully
incarcerated. Did 10 years. Fed[eral] judge overturned conviction. Being
[d]etained [i]llegally. Had $6 million dollar car stolen from me [and] I did not
snitch. My life been stolen from me. My wife been stolen [and] killed by.
(Compl. at 2.) Watkins also writes, “FREE ME,” “FIX [heart symbol],” and D1 (the last
apparently referring to his alias, “Da’ One Abdellah”). (Compl. at 3.) And this is the relief that
he seeks: “Send F.B.I. Took deliver me back 2 life (Real). No more curses[.] Mom iz Devil.”
(Compl. at 4.)
Because Watkins is proceeding without prepayment of the filing fee, the Court must sua
sponte dismiss his complaint if it is “frivolous or malicious” or “fails to state a claim on which
relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Moniz v. Hines, 92 F. App’x 208, 210 (6th
Cir. 2004). Watkins’s claims fall squarely within this statutory language at least because this
Court has no basis to send the FBI to deliver Watkins back to real life.
To the extent that Watkins merely seeks release from prison because his conviction has
been overturned, dismissal is still warranted: “[W]hen a state prisoner is challenging the very
fact or duration of his physical imprisonment, and the relief he seeks is a determination that he is
entitled to immediate release or a speedier release from that imprisonment, his sole federal
remedy is a writ of habeas corpus.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). And there is
no reason to allow Watkins to convert this civil suit to a habeas corpus petition, see Moore v.
Pemberton, 110 F.3d 22, 23 (7th Cir. 1997), especially because he already has a habeas corpus
petition pending in this District.
Watkins’s complaint will thus be DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
See Barnes v. Lewis, 12 F.3d 211 (table), 1993 WL 515483, at *1 (6th Cir. 1993) (affirming
dismissal of similar complaint under predecessor to § 1915(e)(2)(B)).
SO ORDERED.
s/Laurie J. Michelson
LAURIE J. MICHELSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: October 19, 2015
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing document was served on the attorneys
and/or parties of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on October 19, 2015.
s/Jane Johnson
Case Manager to
Honorable Laurie J. Michelson
2
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?