Paige v. Sweeney

Filing 4

Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The Court certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 2/26/2015. (JLG)

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL L. PAIGE,
Plaintiff,
v.
MAUREEN A. SWEENEY, Judge,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 4:14CV2006
JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

On September 10, 2014, Plaintiff pro se Michael L. Paige filed this action under 42
U.S.C. § 1983 against Ohio Court of Common Pleas Judge Maureen A. Sweeney. Plaintiff, an
inmate at the Mahoning County Jail, alleges he has been incarcerated there on pending charges
since October 2012. In March 3, 2014, a jury acquitted him of Aggravated Murder, but could not
reach a unanimous verdict on the remaining charges of Murder and Tampering with Evidence.
Plaintiff seeks damages and release from incarceration.
A district court is expressly required to dismiss any civil action filed by a prisoner
seeking relief from a governmental officer or entity, as soon as possible after docketing, if the
court concludes that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if
the plaintiff seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
1915A; Siller v. Dean, No. 99-5323, 2000 WL 145167, at *2 (6th Cir. Feb. 1, 2000).
The Supreme Court has held that, when a prisoner challenges "the very fact or duration of
his physical imprisonment, ... his sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus." Preiser v.
Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 501 (1973). Further, judges are immune from liability for actions taken
within the scope of their official jurisdiction. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 554 (1967). There is

no suggestion in the Complaint that Judge Sweeney acted outside of the scope of her jurisdiction
with regard to the actions of which Plaintiff complains.
Accordingly, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The Court certifies
that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 26, 2015
Date

/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge

-2-