Miller v. Franks et al

Filing 7

Memorandum Opinion and Order. The Complaint 1 is dismissed with prejudice, and an associated Motion is denied as moot 3 . This Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an appeal could not be taken from this Order of Dismissal in good faith. Judge Jack Zouhary on 5/9/2014. (D,L)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Thomas S. Miller,

Case No. 3:14 CV 268
Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER

-vsJUDGE JACK ZOUHARY
Ruth Ann Franks, et al.,
Defendants.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is granted.
Though pro se filings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982)
(per curiam), this Court must dismiss an in forma pauperis action under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e) if it lacks
an arguable basis in law or fact. See McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 608–09 (6th Cir. 1997).
Thus, Plaintiff Thomas Miller’s “Civil COMPLAINT for Illegal Wrongful Imprisonment via Fraud
& via Malice & Willful, violations of Plaintiff’s U.S. Republic Constitutional Rights” (Doc. 1) must
be dismissed.
No purpose would be served by reciting in detail the allegations contained in Plaintiff’s
Complaint. In short verse, Plaintiff sues various Ohio officials for deprivation of his federal
constitutional rights, on the theory that the state officials involved in his conviction for various statelaw criminal offenses participated in fraudulent proceedings. Plaintiff alleges, for example, an Ohio
court that convicted him lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because “ALL LAWS, TODAY IN
AMERICA, ARE COPYRIGHTED ‘FOREIGN PROPERTY OF THE BRITISH” -- apparently

making these laws the property of private British citizens and insufficient to support a criminal
conviction in an Ohio court (Doc. 1 at 3, 5). These and other allegations contained in the Complaint
are clearly baseless. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989).
The Complaint (Doc. 1) is dismissed with prejudice, and an associated Motion is denied as
moot (Doc. 3). This Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal could not be
taken from this Order of Dismissal in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Jack Zouhary
JACK ZOUHARY
U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE
May 9, 2014

2