Dailey v. Middleton et al

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The complaint is DISMISSED. To the extent that a judgment in favor of Dailey would necessarily imply the invalidity of his convictions, Dailey's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions are met. All other claims are DISMISSED with prejudice for all purposes. All motions not previously ruled on are hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 09/24/13. (mll, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
ANTHONY R. DAILEY, #60533-080

§

VS.

§

ROBERT JAMES MIDDLETON, ET AL.

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:13cv485

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff Anthony R. Dailey, an inmate confined at F.C.I. Gilmer, proceeding pro se and in
forma pauperis, filed this civil lawsuit complaining about his bank robbery and aiding and abetting
convictions in Case Number 6:04cr67-001. He alleged that he was subjected to an illegal search and
seizure, false imprisonment, a denial of due process, and a denial of equal protection. The complaint
was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell, who issued a Report and
Recommendation concluding that complaint is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87
(1994). Alternatively, any claims not barred by Heck would be time-barred. Dailey has filed
objections.
Dailey argued that his lawsuit is not barred by Heck in light of the Supreme Court’s recent
decision in Skinner v. Switzer, 131 S. Ct. 1289 (2011). Skinner, however, is of no help to him. The
Supreme Court simply held that an inmate could proceed with his request for D.N.A. testing in a civil
rights lawsuit despite Heck. Id. at 1298. It was noted that “[s]uccess in his suit for DNA testing would
not ‘necessarily imply’ the invalidity of his conviction.” Id. By comparison, Dailey’s lawsuit is a
direct challenge to his convictions and success in this case would necessarily imply the invalidity of
the convictions. Skinner does not provide a gateway for Dailey to proceed on his claims. The lawsuit
is barred by Heck.

1

The Report of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her proposed findings of fact and
recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration, and having
made a de novo review of the objections raised by Dailey to the Report, the Court is of the opinion that
the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the objections raised by Dailey
are without merit. Therefore the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate
Judge as the findings and conclusions of the Court. It is accordingly
ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). To the
extent that a judgment in favor of Dailey would necessarily imply the invalidity of his convictions,
Dailey’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions
are met. All other claims are DISMISSED with prejudice for all purposes. It is finally
ORDERED that all motions not previously ruled on are hereby DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 24th day of September, 2013.

__________________________________
LEONARD DAVIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2