Leith v. Oklahoma State of et al

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 17 and dismissing this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(e)(2)(B)(ii)-(iii), and 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief may be granted. Signed by Honorable Vicki Miles-LaGrange on 6/20/2012. (ks)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
AARON LANCE LEITH,
Plaintiff,
vs.
THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA,
KAY COUNTY, JUDGE D.W. BOYD )
AND JENNIFER LAYTON,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-12-419-M

)
)
)
ORDER

On May 23, 2012, United States Magistrate Judge Robert E. Bacharach issued a Report and
Recommendation in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of plaintiff’s federal
rights. The Magistrate Judge recommended that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(e)(2)(B)(ii)-(iii), and
1915A(b) this action be summarily dismissed. The causes of action for a writ of habeas corpus and relief
against the Kay County do not state a claim on which relief can be granted and the State of Oklahoma, Judge
Boyd and Ms. Layton enjoy immunity on the claims for damages. Plaintiff was advised of his right to object
to the Report and Recommendation by June 11, 2012. Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the Report and
Recommendation.
Accordingly, upon de novo review, the Court:
(1)

ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation issued by the Magistrate Judge on May 23, 2012,
and

(2)

DISMISSES this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(e)(2)(B)(ii)-(iii), and 1915A(b) for
failure to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief may be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of June, 2012.