Smith v. Dunklin County Court et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 42:1983 (prisoner) filed by Plaintiff Williette Smith motion is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of $3.83 within thi rty (30) days of the date of this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint because the complaint is legally frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or both. An Order of Dismissal will accompany this Memorandum and Order.. Signed by Honorable Stephen N Limbaugh, Jr on 04/30/2009. (JMC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION WILLIETTE SMITH, Plaintiff, v. DUNKLIN COUNTY COURT, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 1:09CV39 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court upon the motion of Williette Smith (registration no. 321869), an inmate at Missouri Eastern Correctional Center, for leave to commence this action without payment of the required filing fee [Doc. #2]. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee and will assess an initial partial filing fee of $3.83. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Furthermore, based upon a review of the complaint, the Court finds that the complaint should be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount of the filing fee. If the prisoner has insufficient funds in his or her prison account to pay the entire fee, the Court must assess and, when funds exist, collect an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the

greater of (1) the average monthly deposits in the prisoner's account, or (2) the average monthly balance in the prisoner's account for the prior six-month period. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the prisoner is required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of the prisoner will forward these monthly payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the prisoner's account exceeds $10, until the filing fee is fully paid. Id. Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit and a certified copy of his prison account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the submission of his complaint. A review of plaintiff's account indicates an average monthly deposit of $19.16, and an average monthly balance of $1.43. Plaintiff has insufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee. Accordingly, the Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $3.83, which is 20 percent of plaintiff's average monthly deposit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court may dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis in either law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action fails to
-2-

state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1974 (2007). In reviewing a pro se complaint under § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must give the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 3233 (1992); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974). The Complaint Plaintiff brings this action 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Named as defendants are the Dunklin County Court, Stephen R. Sharp (Circuit Judge), the Malden Municipal Court, Phillip Santie (Municipal Judge), Debbie Brown (Court Clerk), Linda Pierce (Malden Police Officer), Frank Goines (same), and Stephen Sokoloff (Prosecuting Attorney). The complaint seeks monetary and injunctive relief. Plaintiff alleges that he was brought before defendant Sharp for a probation violation. Plaintiff claims that Sokoloff had only a probable cause affidavit and no other evidence. Plaintiff says that he pled guilty to the charges and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment.

-3-

Discussion To establish a prima facie case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) the action occurred "under color of law," and (2) the action is a deprivation of a constitutional or federal statutory right. Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535 (1981). The allegations do not state a prima facie case under § 1983 because they do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. The complaint is silent as to whether defendants are being sued in their official or individual capacities. Where a "complaint is silent about the capacity in which [plaintiff] is suing defendant, [a district court must] interpret the complaint as including only official-capacity claims." Egerdahl v. Hibbing Community College, 72 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir. 1995); Nix v. Norman, 879 F.2d 429, 431 (8th Cir. 1989). Naming a government official in his or her official capacity is the equivalent of naming the government entity that employs the official. Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989). To state a claim against a municipality or a government official in his or her official capacity, plaintiff must allege that a policy or custom of the government entity is responsible for the alleged constitutional violation. Monell v. Dep't of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690-91 (1978). The instant complaint does not contain any allegations that a policy or custom of a government entity was responsible for the alleged violations of plaintiff's
-4-

constitutional rights. As a result, the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's allegations against defendants Sharp and Santie are frivolous. Defendants Sharp and Santie are immune from liability for damages under section 1983 because the alleged wrongdoings were performed within his judicial capacity. See Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356-57 (1978). The filing of complaints and other legal documents is an integral part of the judicial process. Thus, defendant Brown is protected by judicial immunity from damages for alleged civil rights violations committed in connection with the performance of such tasks. See Smith v. Erickson, 884 F.2d 1108, 1111 (8th Cir. 1989). The complaint is legally frivolous as to defendant Sokoloff because, where "the prosecutor is acting as advocate for the state in a criminal prosecution, [] the prosecutor is entitled to absolute immunity." Brodnicki v. City of Omaha, 75 F.3d 1261, 1266 (8th Cir. 1996). Finally, the complaint is legally frivolous as to the Dunklin County Court and the Malden Municipal Court because "courts as entities are not vulnerable to § 1983 suits, because they are protected by state immunity under the eleventh amendment. A court is not a `person' within the meaning of the Civil Rights Act." Harris v.

-5-

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western Dist., 787 F.2d 427, 429 (8th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted). For these reasons, the complaint must be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of $3.83 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court," and to include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number; and (4) that the remittance is for an original proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint because the complaint is legally frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or both. An Order of Dismissal will accompany this Memorandum and Order. Dated this 30th Day of April, 2009.

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-6-