Opinion
Case No. 1:13-cv-01368-SAB PC
2013-09-11
KEVIN LONG, Plaintiff, v. USA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AS FRIVOLOUS
(ECF No. 1)
ORDER THAT DISMISSAL IS SUBJECT TO 28
U.S.C. § 1915(G)
Plaintiff Kevin Long is a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's complaint, filed August 26, 2013. (ECF No. 1.) The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous or malicious," that "fail[] to state a claim on which relief may be granted," or that "seek[] monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). For the reasons set forth below, this action shall be dismissed as frivolous.
On September 10, 2013, Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. (ECF No. 5.)
I.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Plaintiff states that according to the scriptures, Jesus Christ has made him a priest. (Compl. 4, ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff contends that this gives him "the privilege of universal court jurisdiction and immunity from being judged by anyone. USA, California, Stanislaus Superior Court is denying [his] privilege and immunity from judgment." (Id.) Plaintiff is seeking to have this Court dismiss the action against him in Stanislaus Superior Court because he is immune from judgment and that he be released immediately into the world as he is the saint king of them. (Id.)
All references to pagination of specific documents pertain to those as indicated on the upper right corners via the CM/ECF electronic court docketing system.
--------
Plaintiff claims that according to his religion he can determine what is right and wrong and exercise it immediately without discrimination. Plaintiff has determined that his rights and immunities are being denied and judges that his relief shall be granted. (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff states that he is god and the Court cannot say that he is not right. (Id. at 6.)
II.
DISCUSSION
The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous". 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). A complaint is frivolous under section 1915(e) "where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992) (quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989)). "[A] finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged are "clearly baseless," "fantastic," and "delusional." Denton, 504 U.S. at 32-33.
Prisoners proceeding pro se in civil rights actions are entitled to have their pleadings liberally construed and to have any doubt resolved in their favor. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2012) (citations omitted). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). To survive screening, Plaintiff's claims must be facially plausible, which requires sufficient factual detail to allow the Court to reasonably infer that each named defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678-79; Moss v. U.S. Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009).
In this instance, the Court finds that Plaintiff's claims rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible. Denton, 504 U.S. at 33. Plaintiff believes himself to be god and beyond the authority of the United States government. Plaintiff states that he is to be released into the world because he is the saint king. Further, Plaintiff contends that he can determine what is right and wrong and the Court cannot tell him that he is wrong.
Courts in this District have previously dismissed two similar complaints as frivolous. Long v. Stanislaus Superior Court, No. 2:13-cv-01071-EFB, ECF No. 8 (E.D. Cal. July 9, 2013); Long v. United States of America, No. 1:13-cv-01228-JLT (PC), ECF No. 4 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2013). As in these prior complaints, Plaintiff presents claims that are "fanciful" and "delusional" legal and factual arguments. Plaintiff's complaint does not state a facially plausible claim showing that he is entitled to relief. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 678-79.
While freedom of religion is important to the constitution structure of the American legal system, such a freedom does not allow persons to ignore and simply disregard the laws of the United States. The higher power in the legal system of the United States is the United States Constitution. In this situation, Plaintiff's beliefs as to his powers do not trump the United States Constitution, a document which provides that the federal courts interpret the laws of the United States. U.S. Const. Art. III. Exercising my constitutional authority, I find that the Plaintiff's complaint is frivolous as the complaint is clearly baseless, fantastic, delusional and without any merit. Therefore, Plaintiff's complaint shall be dismissed without leave to amend.
III.
ORDER
Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), this action is HEREBY DISMISSED as FRIVOLOUS without leave to amend and the Clerk's Office shall enter judgment. This dismissal is subject to the "three-strikes" provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2011). IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE