Opinion
3:23-cv-0031-x-bn
02-16-2023
CARLOS ROSS,, v. ELLIS COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al., .
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
BRANTLEY STARR, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in this case. [Doc. No. 6]. Plaintiff Carlos Ross, a prisoner, filed a pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that an Ennis police officer and an Ellis County Sheriff's deputy elicited testimony from him in violation of Miranda.Ross's complaint does not allege that any improperly obtained confession has yet been used against him. Noting that “a violation of Miranda does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Constitution,” the Magistrate Judge recommended that Ross's claims under § 1983 based solely on Miranda be dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Since Ross has asserted no unconstitutional use of his allegedly 1 improper confession, the Magistrate Judge recommended that any constitutionally based § 1983 claims be dismissed without prejudice.
Doc. No. 1 at 3.
Doc. No. 6 at 3-5 (quoting Vega v. Tekoh, 142 S.Ct. 2095, 2106 (2022)).
Id. at 4.
Ross filed no objection to the Magistrate Judge's findings, conclusions, and recommendation.
The District Court reviewed for plain error the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation. Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Ross's § 1983 claims that are based solely on Miranda under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE any constitutionally based § 1983 claims Ross alleges.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 2