Williams v. The State of Texas Department of Criminal Justice

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER dismissing with prejudice 1 Complaint, granting 2 APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Email sent to Manager of Three Strikes List. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
April 18, 2017

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
CRAIG GERARD WILLIAMS,
TDCJ #787217,

David J. Bradley, Clerk

§
§
§
§
§

Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-17-1150

§
§
§
§
§
§

STATE OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT
OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

The

plaintiff,

Craig

Gerard

Williams

(TDCJ

#787217),

is

presently incarcerated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
- Correctional Institutions Division ("TDCJ").
a

Prisoner

("Complaint")
continued
conviction.
Forma

Civil

Rights

Complaint

under

Williams has filed
42

U.S.C.

§

1983

(Docket Entry No. 1) , challenging the validity of his

confinement

pursuant

to

a

state

court

judgment

of

Williams has also filed an Application to Proceed In

Pauperis

(Docket

Entry

No.

2).

Because

Williams

is

incarcerated, the court is required to scrutinize the claims and
dismiss the Complaint, in whole or in part, if it determines that
the Complaint "is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted" or "seeks monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief."

28 U.S.C.

§

1915A(b).

After reviewing all of the pleadings, the court concludes that this
case must be dismissed for the reasons explained below.

I .

Background

Williams is currently serving four concurrent 50-year terms of
imprisonment as the result of several convictions entered against
him on May 13,

1997,

(three

and

counts)

for aggravated sexual assault of a

indecency with

a

child

(one

child

count) . 1 Those

convictions were affirmed on appeal in an unpublished opinion. 2
2012, Williams sought habeas relief under 28 U.S.C.

§

In

2254, but his

petition was dismissed with prejudice as barred by the governing
one-year statute of limitations on federal

review. 3

The

Fifth

Circuit denied a certificate of appealability from that decision in
2014. 4
On April 4,
U.S.C.

§

1983,

2017,

Williams executed his Complaint under 42

challenging

his

continued

confinement

validity of the convictions entered against him in 1997. 5

and

the

Williams

appears to claim that he is "innocent" and would not have been
convicted but for the fact that a "crucial" witness for the defense

1

0ffender Information Detail, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
available at http: //offender. tdcj. texas. gov (last visited April 17,
2017) .
2

Williams v. State, Nos. 14-97-00569-CR,
9700575-CR, 14-97-00576-CR, 1999 WL 966647
[14th Dist. Oct. 21, 1999), pet. ref'd).

3

Williams v. Thaler,
Dec . 5 , 2 0 12 ) .

4

No.

H-12-0558,

14-97-00572-CR, 14(Tex. App. - Houston

2012 WL 12871880

(S.D.

Tex.

Williams v. Stephens, 555 F. App'x 439 (5th Cir. Feb. 20, 2014).

5

Complaint, Docket Entry No. 1, pp.5-6.

-2-

was a "no show" at trial.
have

been

6

Alleging that his constitutional rights

"intentionally

and

blatantly

violated

to

keep

him

incarcerated," Williams seeks $9, 500, 000. 00 in compensatory damages
and his immediate release from custody. 7

Discussion

II.

Williams plainly seeks monetary damages under 42 U.S.C.
for

his

wrongful

conviction

and

imprisonment.

It

1983

§

is

well

established that a civil rights plaintiff may not recover damages
based

on

allegations

imprisonment,

or

for

unlawfulness

would

of

"unconstitutional

other

render

a

harm

caused

conviction

or

conviction

by

actions

sentence

or

whose

invalid,"

without first proving that the challenged conviction or sentence
has been "reversed on direct appeal, expunged by executive order,
declared

invalid

determinations,

by
or

a

state

called

tribunal

into

authorized

question

by

issuance of a writ of habeas corpus

[under]

Heck v.

2372

Humphrey,

114

S.

Ct.

2364,

a

to

make

federal

28 U.S. C.

(1994).

such

court's
§

2254."

A claim for

damages that bears a relationship to a conviction or sentence that
has
§

not

been

1983.

Id.

so

invalidated is
In other words,

not
if

cognizable
a

judgment

under
in

42

U.S. C.

favor

of the

plaintiff would "necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction

6

Id. at 6.

7

Id. at 4.
-3-

or sentence," then the complaint must be dismissed unless the
plaintiff can demonstrate that
already been invalidated.

the

conviction or

sentence has

Id.

As Williams appears to concede in his pleadings, his federal
habeas

corpus

convictions
Williams

proceeding

have

does

not

not

was

been

unsuccessful

set

demonstrate

aside
that

or
his

and

the

challenged
Because

invalidated.
convictions

have

been

invalidated, his civil rights claims are not cognizable under 42
U.S.C.
See

§

1983 and his Complaint must be dismissed with prejudice.

Johnson

(explaining

v.
that

McElveen,

101

F.3d

claims

barred

by

423,

424

(5th

Cir.

1996)

Heck

are

"dismissed

with

prejudice to their being asserted again until the Heck conditions
are met") . Accordingly,

this case will be dismissed as legally

frivolous for purposes of 28 U.S.C.
III.

§

1915A(b).

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the court ORDERS as follows:
1.

The Complaint filed by Craig Gerard Williams

(Docket

Entry No.

1)

legally

frivolous.

The dismissal will count as a "strike" for

is DISMISSED with prejudice as

purposes of 28 U.S.C.
2.

The Application to

§

1915(g).

Proceed In Forma Pauperis

Entry No. 2) is GRANTED.

-4-

(Docket

3.

The TDCJ Inmate Trust Fund is ORDERED to deduct funds
from the trust account of Craig Gerard Williams
#787217)
basis,
§

and forward them to

the Clerk on a

(TDCJ

regular

in compliance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

1915(b), until the entire filing fee ($350.00) has been

paid.
The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Memorandum
Opinion and Order to the plaintiff. The Clerk will also provide a
copy by regular mail, facsimile transmission, or e-mail to: (l) the
TDCJ -

Office of the General Counsel,

P.O.

Box 13084,

Austin,

Texas, 78711, Fax Number [phone]; (2) the Inmate Trust Fund,
P.O. Box 629, Huntsville, Texas 77342-0629, fax: [phone]; and

(3) the Manager of the Three-Strikes List for the Southern District
of Texas.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this /9-ll.day of

A )0 \'~I

SIM LAKE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-5-

' 2017.