Beals v. Fields et al

Filing 29

ORDER ADOPTING 20 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; mailed to Timothy L Beals #235183 SAYRE-NFCC 1605 E Main Sayre, OK 73662. Signed by Honorable Robin J. Cauthron on 2/28/17. (lg)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA TIMOTHY BEALS, Plaintiff, vs. KYLE FIELDS, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CIV-16-1182-C ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This civil rights action brought by a prisoner, proceeding pro se, was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bernard M. Jones, consistent with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Judge Jones entered a Report and Recommendation on December 23, 2016, to which Petitioner has timely objected. On January 27, 2016, Plaintiff was granted until February 17, 2017, to supplement his Objection, but no supplement has been received as of this date. The Court therefore considers the matter de novo. Plaintiff’s Objection seeks to avoid the bar of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), alleging his attempts to involve this Court in abating ongoing constitutional violations should excuse the bar. Plaintiff has cited no authority for this proposition and the Court knows of none. The recommendations of Judge Jones reflect no dispute on relevant facts and are supported by governing law. Accordingly, the Court adopts, in its entirety, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and for the reasons announced therein, Plaintiff’s federal claims are dismissed sua sponte for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. This dismissal count as a prior-occasion “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court declines to exercise pendent jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claim of slander against Mr. Fields. A judgment will enter accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of February, 2017.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?