Martin v. Brice

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9 in full. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g). Any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Brian Morris on 3/21/2018. Mailed to Martin (TAG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
GREAT FALLS DIVISION
JASON BRYAN MARTIN,
Plaintiff,

CV 17-60-GF-BMM-JTJ

vs.
LOGAN BRYCE,

ORDER
Defendant.

Plaintiff Jason Martin (Martin) is a prisoner proceeding pro se. Martin filed a
Complaint on June 26, 2017. (Doc. 2). Martin alleges constitutional claims under
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S.
388 (1971). Martin alleges that Deputy United States Marshal Logan Bryce
violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
by using excessive force against him during his arrest on February 29, 2016. (Doc.
2 at 6).
United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston conducted an initial screening
of Martin’s Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Judge Johnston issued Findings
and Recommendations in this matter on January 10, 2018. (Doc. 9). Judge
Johnston determined that the Complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted. (Doc. 9 at 12). Judge Johnston explained why the allegations in

the Complaint failed to state a cognizable claim for excessive use of force. (Doc. 9
at 6-12). Judge Johnston determined that the defects in the Complaint could not be
cured by further amendment. (Doc. 9 at 12). Judge Johnston recommended that
Martin’s Complaint be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 9 at 13). Martin
did not file objections to Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations.
The Court has reviewed Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations
for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656
F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). The Court finds no error in Judge Johnston’s
Findings and Recommendations, and adopts them in full.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
1.

Martin’s Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED with prejudice.

2.

The filing of this action counts as one strike for failure to state a claim.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
3.

Any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith as

Martin’s claims lack arguable substance in law or fact.
4.

The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

DATED this 21st day of March, 2018.

-2-