From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Bazilius

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Oct 4, 2016
CASE NO. 1:16 CV 2346 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 4, 2016)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:16 CV 2346

10-04-2016

WALTER LEE HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. CYNTHIA BAZILIUS, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER

On September 22, 2016, Plaintiff pro se Walter Lee Harris, an inmate at the Cuyahoga County Jail, filed this civil rights action against Cleveland Police Detective Cynthia Bazilius, Sheriff Clifford Pinkney, and "State Attorney" Jeffrey S. Shnatter. Plaintiff alleges in the Complaint that he was subjected to an unlawful search and arrest, that his bond was revoked based on unknown warrant, and that his pending retrial violates his speedy trial rights and subjects him to double jeopardy. He asserts his current detention is therefore unlawful. For the reasons stated below, this action is dismissed.

A district court is expressly required to dismiss any civil action filed by a prisoner seeking relief from a governmental officer or entity, as soon as possible after docketing, if the court concludes that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if the plaintiff seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §1915A; Siller v. Dean, No. 99-5323, 2000 WL 145167 , at *2 (6th Cir. Feb. 1, 2000).

The Supreme Court has held that, when a prisoner challenges "the very fact or duration of his physical imprisonment, ... his sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus." Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 501 (1973). Further, absent allegations that criminal proceedings terminated in Plaintiff's favor or that a conviction stemming from the asserted violation of his rights was reversed, expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state tribunal, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, he may not recover damages for his claim. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994).

Accordingly, this action is dismissed under section 1915A. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Christopher A. Boyko

CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: October 4, 2016


Summaries of

Harris v. Bazilius

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Oct 4, 2016
CASE NO. 1:16 CV 2346 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 4, 2016)
Case details for

Harris v. Bazilius

Case Details

Full title:WALTER LEE HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. CYNTHIA BAZILIUS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Date published: Oct 4, 2016

Citations

CASE NO. 1:16 CV 2346 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 4, 2016)