From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Georgia

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Apr 9, 2008
273 F. App'x 812 (11th Cir. 2008)

Summary

affirming sua sponte dismissal on Younger abstention grounds in a case that attempted to challenge an ongoing state criminal prosecution

Summary of this case from Collier v. Gainey

Opinion

No. 07-15550 Non-Argument Calendar.

April 9, 2008.

Derrick Jackson, Riverdale, GA, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. D.C. Docket No. 07-00333-CV-CAR-5.

Before TJOFLAT, DUBINA and BLACK, Circuit Judges.


Appellant Derrick Jackson appeals the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his amended complaint seeking an injunction to halt state court criminal proceedings. On appeal, Jackson argues that the district court erred because there is precedent establishing that, when necessary for the protection of constitutional rights, the federal courts have the power to issue injunctions enjoining state prosecutions. Jackson argues that the Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), abstention doctrine does not apply because there are no legitimate state activities at issue.

We review de novo a sua sponte dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim, Leal v. Ga. Dep't of Corr., 254 F.3d 1276, 1279 (11th Cir. 2001), and review dismissal of a complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for abuse of discretion. Bilal v. Driver, 251 F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir. 2001). In addressing whether abstention is appropriate in a given case, we review the district court's decision to abstain for abuse of discretion. Boyes v. Shell Oil Prod. Co., 199 F.3d 1260, 1265 (11th Cir. 2000).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, a federal court is required to dismiss a complaint against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity at any time if the court determines that the action "(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

A claim is frivolous when, on the face of the complaint, the factual allegations are "clearly baseless," or the legal allegations are "indisputably meritless." Carroll v. Gross, 984 F.2d 392, 393 (11th Cir. 1993) (citation omitted). A complaint may be dismissed for failure to state a claim when it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief. Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593, 598, 109 S.Ct. 1378, 1382, 103 L.Ed.2d 628 (1989).

Attentive to the principles of equity, comity, and federalism, the Supreme Court has recognized that federal courts should abstain from exercising jurisdiction in suits aimed at restraining pending state criminal prosecutions. Younger, 401 U.S. at 41, 91 S.Ct. at 749; For Your Eyes Alone, Inc. v. City of Columbus, Ga., 281 F.3d 1209, 1216 (11th Cir. 2002).

Jackson's state criminal prosecution was pending at the time he filed his federal complaint. Thus, if the district court granted relief to Jackson, it would be restraining a pending state criminal prosecution. Accordingly, the district court did not err when it found that Jackson's complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Since the standard of review for failure to state a claim is more stringent than that of dismissal for frivolity, the district court likewise did not err, if it dismissed the complaint for frivolity. Furthermore, because the criminal proceedings were ongoing at the time of the complaint, the application of the abstention doctrine by the district court was not an abuse of discretion.

For the aforementioned reasons, we affirm the judgment of dismissal.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Jackson v. Georgia

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Apr 9, 2008
273 F. App'x 812 (11th Cir. 2008)

affirming sua sponte dismissal on Younger abstention grounds in a case that attempted to challenge an ongoing state criminal prosecution

Summary of this case from Collier v. Gainey

affirming sue sponte dismissal due to Younger abstention

Summary of this case from Curry v. Galbreath

affirming sua sponte dismissal under § 1915A due to Younger-abstention

Summary of this case from Christopher v. Glynn Cnty.

affirming sua sponte dismissal due to Younger abstention

Summary of this case from Coley v. Wiggins

affirming sua sponte dismissal due to Younger abstention

Summary of this case from Dawson v. Perkins

affirming sua sponte dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A due to Younger abstention

Summary of this case from Burbank v. Kirkconnell

affirming sua sponte dismissal due to Younger abstention

Summary of this case from Nurse v. Richmond Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't

affirming sua sponte dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A due to Younger abstention

Summary of this case from Jones v. Seary

affirming district court's dismissal of § 1983 action seeking to halt state criminal proceedings against the plaintiff based on Younger

Summary of this case from Coverson v. Yeager
Case details for

Jackson v. Georgia

Case Details

Full title:Derrick JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of GEORGIA, Defendant, Page…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Date published: Apr 9, 2008

Citations

273 F. App'x 812 (11th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

Young v. Heap

The bottom line is that Young simply cannot attack ongoing state court criminal proceedings in federal court…

Young v. Heap

The Court screens his complaint to determine whether he has stated a cognizable claim for relief. 28 U.S.C. §…