Summary
In Kennedy, the state trial court declined to give the jury an instruction on self-defense because there was "not a scintilla of evidence that excessive force was used."
Summary of this case from Martinez v. CaggianoOpinion
Civil Action No. 13-cv-00920-REB-KLM
08-01-2014
COYLE KENNEDY, Plaintiff, v. ADAM GOLDEN, DPD, JACOB ROBB, DPD, MARK MILLER, DPD, BRIAN MARSHALL, DPD, and DEREK HANCOCK, DPD, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the following: (1) the Motion to Dismiss [#36]filed by the defendants on September 18, 2013; and (2) the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#46] filed March 4, 2014. The plaintiff filed objections [#47] to the recommendation. I overrule the objections, approve and adopt the recommendation, and grant the motion to dismiss.
"[#36]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.
The plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Thus, I have construed his pleadings and other filings more liberally and held them to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Andrews v. Heaton, 483 F.3d 1070, 1076 (10th Cir. 2007); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991).
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the recommendation to which the plaintiff objects. I have considered carefully the recommendation, the objections, and the applicable case law.
In his complaint [#18], the plaintiff, Coyle Kennedy, alleges that the defendant police officers used excessive force when they arrested Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kennedy faced several criminal charges tied to this arrest, including possession of a controlled substance, resisting arrest, and obstructing a peace officer. At trail, Mr. Kennedy raised the affirmative defense of self defense. Ultimately, the judge in the criminal trial of Mr. Kennedy concluded that it was not proper to instruct the jury on this affirmative defense. The judge concluded that the evidence presented at trial was not sufficient to support the presentation of the affirmative defense of self-defense. A jury convicted Mr. Kennedy of possession of a controlled substance, resisting arrest, and obstructing a peace officer.
Given these circumstances, the magistrate judge concluded that the excessive force claim of Mr. Kennedy is barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). This is so because a judgment in favor of Mr. Kennedy in this case necessarily would imply the invalidity of his conviction for resisting arrest. I conclude that the analysis and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct. Thus, the claims of Mr. Kennedy are barred by Heck.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the objections stated by plaintiff in his objections [#47] are OVERRULED;
2. That the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#46] filed March 4, 2014, is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of this court;
3. That the Motion to Dismiss [#36] filed September 18, 2013, is GRANTED;
4. That the claims of the plaintiff as alleged in his complaint [#18] are DISMISSED with prejudice because they are barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994);
5. That JUDGMENT SHALL ENTER in favor of the defendants, Adam Golden, DPD, Jacob Robb, DPD, Mark Miller, DPD, Brian Marshall, DPD, and Derek Hancock, DPD, against the plaintiff, Coyle Kennedy, on each of the claims alleged in the complaint [#18];
6. That the defendants are AWARDED their costs to be taxed by the clerk of the court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1; and
7. That this case is CLOSED.
Dated August 1, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
/s/_________
Robert E. Blackburn
United States District Judge