From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pelko v. Stith

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Mar 13, 2024
Civil Action 2:23-CV-00296 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 13, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:23-CV-00296

03-13-2024

JOHN D PELKO, Plaintiff, v. DAVID STITH, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS CASE

NELVA GONZALES RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On February 8, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation to Dismiss Case” (D.E. 31). Plaintiff was provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge's memorandum and recommendation. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); General Order No. 200213. No objections have been timely filed.

When no timely objection to a magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge's memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996)).

Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge's memorandum and recommendation (D.E. 31), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly,

• Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claims against Sheriff Hooper are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
• Plaintiff's various claims against Judge Stith, Assistant District Attorney Reyes, and Sheriff Hooper - in connection with challenging the validity of his conviction and 20-year sentence in Case No. 21-FC-1523G - are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous until such time as Plaintiff satisfies the conditions set forth in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994); and
• Plaintiff's remaining claims against Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous, for failure to state a claim for relief, or on immunity grounds.

The Court further ORDERS that this dismissal counts as a “STRIKE” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and INSTRUCTS the Clerk of Court to send notice of this dismissal to the Manager of the Three Strikes List for the Southern District of Texas at Three_Strikes@txs.uscourts.gov.

ORDERED.


Summaries of

Pelko v. Stith

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Mar 13, 2024
Civil Action 2:23-CV-00296 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 13, 2024)
Case details for

Pelko v. Stith

Case Details

Full title:JOHN D PELKO, Plaintiff, v. DAVID STITH, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Texas

Date published: Mar 13, 2024

Citations

Civil Action 2:23-CV-00296 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 13, 2024)

Citing Cases

Pelko v. Perales

Plaintiff already has accumulated three strikes for filing frivolous lawsuits. See Pelko v. Mixon, et al.,…