Berry v. Westmoreland

Filing 4

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Plaintiff's complaint should be summarily dismissed with prejudice. Magistrate Judge Jeff Kaplan no longer assigned to case. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Jeff Kaplan on 1/14/2009) (mfw)

IN THE LTNITED DISTRICTCOURT STATES NORTHERNDISTRICTOF TEXAS D A L L A S DIVISION MARK EDWARD BERRY Plaintiff, VS. LEE BARRETT WESTMORELAND
Defendant.

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

NO.3-09-CV-0064-L

F I N D I N G S AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE U N I T E D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This case has been referred to the United States magistrate judge for initial screening from the district court. The findings orderof reference p u r s u a n t 28 U.S.C. $ 636(b)anda standing to judge are as follow: of a n d recommendation the magistrate I. This is apro se civil rights action brought by Mark Edward Berry, a Texas prisoner, against a On Lee BarrettWestmoreland. Januarylz,z}}g,plaintiff tendered complaint h i s former attorney, to the district clerk and filed an application to proceedin forma pauperis. Becausethe information to provided by plaintiff in his pauper'saffidavit indicatesthat he lacks the funds necessary prosecute t h i s case, court grantedleavetoproceedinformapauperis and allowedthecomplaintto be filed. the The court now determinesthat this caseshould be summarily dismissed. II. In2006,plaintiff was convicted of aggravatedsexual assaultof a child and indecencywith in a child. He is cunently servinga life sentence the TDCJ-CID. Plaintiff now contendsthat he failed to Lee BarrettWestmoreland, his of r e c e i v e dineffectiveassistance counselbecause attorney,

investigate case, the refused call anywitnesses, did not appeal convictions. this suit, his By to and plaintiff seeks and trial. unspecified damages another A. A districtcourtmay summarily dismissa complaintfiled informa pauperisif it concludes that the action: (1) (2) (3)
i s frivolous or malicious: f a i l s to statea claim on which relief may be granted;or seeksmonetaryrelief againsta defendantwho is immune from s u c hrelief.

basisin eitherlaw or fact. 2 8 U.S.C. g 1915(e)(2)(B).An action is frivolous if it lacks an arguable 338 (1989)' In order 490 U.S. 319,325,109S.Ct.1827,1831-32,l04L.Ed.2d N e i t z k ev. Williams, the t o statea claim on which reliefmay be granted, plaintiff mustplead"enoughfactsto statea claim 550 U.S. 544,127S.Ct.1955, on t o relief that is plausible its face." Bell Atlantic Corp.v. Twombly, the 1 9 7 4 , 1 6 7 L.F;d.zd929(2007). While a complaint doesnot needdetailedfactualallegations, and "formulaic recitation[s]of the elements p l a i n t i f f must allegemore than "labels,""conclusions," o f a causeof action[.]" SeeTwombly,127 S.Ct. at 1964-65. "Factualallegationsmust be enough level[.]" Id. at 1965. The court must acceptall wellt o raisea right to relief abovethe speculative pleaded facts as true and view the allegationsin the light most favorable to the plaintiff. SeeIn re Litig.,495 F.3d 191,205 (5th Cir. 2007),cert. denied,128 S.Ct. l23l K a t r i n a Canal Breaches (2008). B. Plaintiff hasfailed to state acognizablefederalcivil rights claim againsthis former attorney. a N e i t h e r appointedcounselnor retainedcounselacts "under color of statelaw" in representing

defendantinthecourseofacriminalproceeding. SeePolkCountyv.Dodson,454U.S.3l2,324-25, (1981); 1 0 2S.Ct.445,453,70L.8d.2d509 Combs Cityof Dallos,289 v. Fed.Appx. 687,2008 684, actor," cannot Westmoreland not a "state is he W L 2831267 at*2 (5thCir. Jul.23,2008).Because under U.S.C. 1983.1 42 b e sued civil rights for violations $ RECOMMENDATION pursuant 28 U.S.C.$ with to dismissed prejudice P l a i n t i f f scomplaint should summarily be

1e1s(e)(2).
A copy of this report and recommendation shall be served on all parties in the manner provided by law. Any party may file written objectionsto the recommendationwithin 10 daysafter b e i n g servedwith a copy. See28 U.S.C. $ 636(bX1);Fsp. R. Ctv. P.72(b). The failure to file written objections will bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistratejudge that are acceptedor adoptedby the district court, except upon AutomobileAss'n,79 F.3d l4I5,I4l7 g r o u n d sof plain error. SeeDouglassv. UnitedServices C i r . 1996). (5th

14,2009. D A T E D : January

LAN

JUDGE MAGISTRATA

I To the extent plaintiff challengesthe validity of his convictions and the duration of his confinement, his corpusunder28 U.S.C. 52254. Jacksonv. Torres,720 as c o m p l a i n tmustbe construed an applicationfor writ of habeas F . 2 d 8 7 7 , 8 7 9 ( 5 t h C i r . 1983).However,itappearsthatplaintiffhasnotpresentedhisineffectiveassistanceofcounsel reliefunderArticle I I .07 ofthe Texas c l a i m to the TexasCourt of Criminal Appealsin an applicationfor post-conviction Procedure. Unless and until plaintiff exhaustshis available stateremedies,he may not seek federal Code of Criminal h a b e a s r e l i e fSeeMurphyv.Quarterman,No.3-08-CV-0749-D,2008WL4937379a|*l-2(N.D.Tex.Nov.14,2008). .