Reeves v. Ohio Court of Appeals

Full title: SHAQUATA REEVES, Plaintiff, v. OHIO COURT OF APPEALS, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Date published: Oct 26, 2015

CASE NO. 1:15 CV 2032 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 26, 2015)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:15 CV 2032

10-26-2015

SHAQUATA REEVES, Plaintiff, v. OHIO COURT OF APPEALS, et al., Defendants.

JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER

On October 1, 2015, Plaintiff pro se Shaquata Reeves filed this in forma pauperis action against Defendants Ohio Court of Appeals for the Eighth Appellate District and John Martin.¹ Plaintiff alleges in her Complaint that Defendants have declined to file a notice of appeal from her criminal conviction, thus violating her constitutional rights.

1 The Complaint indicates Martin is employed by the Ohio Court of Appeals.

Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982) (per curiam), the district court is required to dismiss an action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact.² Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989); Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468, 470 (6^th Cir. 2010).

2 An in forma pauperis claim may be dismissed sua sponte, without prior notice to the plaintiff and without service of process on the defendant, if the court explicitly states that it is invoking section 1915(e) [formerly 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)] and is dismissing the claim for one of the reasons set forth in the statute. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp. v. Smith, 507 F.3d 910, 915 (6^th Cir. 2007); Gibson v. R.G. Smith Co., 915 F.2d 260, 261 (6^th Cir. 1990); Harris v. Johnson, 784 F.2d 222, 224 (6th Cir. 1986). --------

A cause of action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks "plausibility in the complaint." Bell At. Corp. V. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 564 (2007). A pleading must contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009). The factual allegations in the pleading must be sufficient to raise the right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. The plaintiff is not required to include detailed factual allegations, but must provide more than "an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-hanned-me accusation." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (2009). A pleading that offers legal conclusions or a simple recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not meet this pleading standard. Id.

Notices of appeal from criminal convictions in Ohio are not filed in the Ohio Court of Appeals, but rather are required to be filed in the trial court. See, Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 3(A). Thus, Plaintiff's claim is based on a mistaken premise that her notice of appeal should be filed with the Ohio Court of Appeals. Further, even construing the Complaint liberally in a light most favorable to the Plaintiff, Brand v. Motley, 526 F.3d 921, 924 (6^th Cir. 2008), it does not contain allegations reasonably suggesting she might otherwise have a valid federal claim against these Defendants. See, Lillard v. Shelby County Bd. of Educ,, 76 F.3d 716 (6th Cir. 1996)(court not required to accept summary allegations or unwarranted legal conclusions in determining whether complaint states a claim for relief).

Accordingly, this action is dismissed under section 1915(e). 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/ Patricia A. Gaughan

PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: 10/26/15