Smith v. City of St. Louis et al

Filing 8

OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial partial filing fee of $8.67 within thirty (30) days from 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 t he remittance is for an original proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue, because the complaint is legally frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B).IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all remaining pending motions are DENIED as moot.A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. 2 6 ( Initial Partial Filing Fee due by 5/23/2015.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 4/23/15. (CLA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
JOHNCHEZE L. SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:15-CV-416-TCM

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the application of Johncheze L. Smith
(No. 11961) for leave to commence this action without payment of the required
filing fee. After reviewing plaintiff’s financial information, the Court will grant
the motion and assess an initial partial filing fee of $8.67. In addition, and for the
reasons set forth below, the Court will dismiss this action as legally frivolous.
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 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.

See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(b)(1). 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.

See 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.

A review of plaintiff's inmate account statement indicates an average
monthly deposit of $43.33 and an average monthly account balance of $17.59.
Plaintiff has insufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee. Accordingly, the Court
will assess an initial partial filing fee of $8.67, 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 must 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 from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if it "lacks an arguable basis in
either law or fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action is
malicious if it is undertaken for the purpose of harassing the named defendants and
not for the purpose of vindicating a cognizable right.
2

Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F.

Supp. 458, 461-63 (E.D.N.C. 1987), aff'd 826 F.2d 1059 (4th Cir. 1987).

An

action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead
Aenough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.@ Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,570 (2007).
To determine whether an action fails to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted, the Court must engage in a two-step inquiry. First, the Court must
identify the allegations in the complaint that are not entitled to the assumption of
truth. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1950-51 (2009). These include "legal
conclusions" and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that
are] supported by mere conclusory statements."

Id. at 1949. Second, the Court

must determine whether the complaint states a plausible claim for relief.

Id. at

1950-51. This is a "context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw
on its judicial experience and common sense."

Id. at 1950. The plaintiff is

required to plead facts that show more than the "mere possibility of misconduct."
Id. The Court must review the factual allegations in the complaint "to determine
if they plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief."

Id. at 1951. When faced with

alternative explanations for the alleged misconduct, the Court may exercise its
judgment in determining whether plaintiff's conclusion is the most plausible or
whether it is more likely that no misconduct occurred.
3

Id. at 1950, 51-52.

Moreover, in reviewing a pro se complaint under ' 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court
must give the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction.
404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972).

Haines v. Kerner,

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, 32 (1992).
The Complaint
Plaintiff, an inmate at the St. Louis City Justice Center, seeks relief in this 42
U.S.C. ' 1983 action against defendants City of St. Louis, Rick Noble (a police
detective), and “2 Unknown Police Officers.” Plaintiff alleges that defendants
violated his Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights when
they illegally arrested him at his home without probable cause or a warrant. In
addition to monetary damages, plaintiff asks this Court to dismiss all pending state
criminal charges against him and/or “exclu[de] all evidence as fruit of illegal
seizures.”
Discussion
After carefully reviewing plaintiff's allegations, the Court concludes that the
complaint is legally frivolous. Plaintiff is suing Detective Rick Noble and the two
unknown police officers in their official capacities as St. Louis City police officers.
See Egerdahl v. Hibbing Community College, 72 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir. 1995)
4

(where a complaint is silent about defendant=s capacity, Court must interpret the
complaint as including official-capacity claims); 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, such as defendant City of St. Louis, or a government official in his or
her official capacity, a 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). Legal conclusions and
threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action that are supported by mere
conclusory statements are not entitled to the assumption of truth.
Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1950-51.

Ashcroft v.

The instant complaint does not contain any

non-conclusory allegations that a policy or custom of a government entity was
responsible for the alleged violations of plaintiff=s constitutional rights. As such,
the Court will dismiss this action as legally frivolous and for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted as to all defendants.
In accordance with the foregoing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED.
5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial partial filing
fee of $8.67 within thirty (30) days from 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, because the complaint is legally frivolous and fails to state a
See 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B).

claim upon which relief may be granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all remaining pending motions are
DENIED as moot.
A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and
Order.
Dated this 23rd day of April, 2015

___________________________________
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6