James-El v. Detroit Police Department et al

Filing 9

ORDER denying 7 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION STEVEN JAMES-EL, Case Number: 5:17-cv-10791 HON. JOHN CORBETT O’MEARA Plaintiff, v. DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL., Defendants. / ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Plaintiff Steven James-El filed a pro se complaint challenging the conduct of police officers during his arrest in connection with the convictions for which he is currently incarcerated. The Court summarily dismissed the complaint, finding it barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), because a ruling in Plaintiff’s favor would necessarily render his continuing confinement invalid and his continued confinement had not been reversed on direct appeal, called into question by a federal court’s issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, or otherwise invalidated. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(h), a party seeking reconsideration must demonstrate (i) a “palpable defect” by which the court and the parties have been “misled,” and (ii) that “correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.” E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(h)(3). A “palpable defect” is an error that is “obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest or plain.” United States v. Cican, 156 F. Supp. 2d 661, 668 (E.D. Mich. 2001). Plaintiff argues that success on his complaint would not have rendered his continued confinement invalid. In the complaint, Plaintiff claimed that defendants planted the marijuana and firearm. These items both formed the basis for his convictions. Thus a finding in his favor would necessarily imply the invalidity of his confinement. The Court’s decision dismissing the complaint was not based upon a palpable defect by which the Court was misled and the Court will deny the motion. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 7). s/John Corbett O’Meara United States District Judge Date: January 24, 2018 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties of record on this date, January 24, 2018, using the ECF system and/or ordinary mail. s/William Barkholz Case Manager 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?