From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stevens v. Fort Myers Police Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Sep 28, 2012
CASE NO.: 2:12-cv-187-FTM-99AEP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 28, 2012)

Summary

applying Rooker-Feldman, stating "Plaintiff's claims arising out of the purported unlawful search and seizure and other purported wrongdoing cannot have success on the merits of his Section 1983 claim unless the state court wrongly concluded the search was lawful [in denying a motion to suppress]."

Summary of this case from Gaddy v. Sprague

Opinion

CASE NO.: 2:12-cv-187-FTM-99AEP

09-28-2012

JOSEPH MICHAEL STEVENS, Plaintiff, v. FORT MYERS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

The pro se plaintiff moves (Docs. 2 & 18) for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. He attempts to sue (Docs. 1, 12 & 17) numerous state officials (including a state court judge) for sundry federal and state claims related to criminal proceedings pending against the plaintiff in state court. Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli considered the motion (Docs. 2 & 18), issued (Doc. 19) a report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, and recommended denying the motion and dismissing the plaintiff's claims as invalid. The plaintiff objects (Doc. 20) to the Magistrate's report.

Among other relief, the plaintiff seeks $50,000,000 in damages and an ambitious "law, act or doctrine to be created and enforced entitled 'The Joseph Michael Stevens Act' that instructs, describes, informs, reminds, and remedies the dealings surrounding th[e] unlawful procedure initiated by law enforcement so that future law enforcement and judicial court officials do not make the same actions resulting from misconduct and abuse of authority and process." (Docs. 12 & 17).

The Magistrate's report (Doc. 19) is factually and legally sound and is ADOPTED. The plaintiff's objection (Doc. 20) is OVERRULED. Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion (Docs. 2 & 18) is DENIED. The plaintiff's claims (Docs. 1, 12 & 17) based on state law are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; all other claims (Docs. 1, 12 & 17) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The clerk is directed to (1) terminate any pending motion and (2) close the case.

ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on September 28, 2012.

_______________

STEVEN D. MERRYDAY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Stevens v. Fort Myers Police Dep't

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Sep 28, 2012
CASE NO.: 2:12-cv-187-FTM-99AEP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 28, 2012)

applying Rooker-Feldman, stating "Plaintiff's claims arising out of the purported unlawful search and seizure and other purported wrongdoing cannot have success on the merits of his Section 1983 claim unless the state court wrongly concluded the search was lawful [in denying a motion to suppress]."

Summary of this case from Gaddy v. Sprague
Case details for

Stevens v. Fort Myers Police Dep't

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH MICHAEL STEVENS, Plaintiff, v. FORT MYERS POLICE DEPARTMENT, et…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Date published: Sep 28, 2012

Citations

CASE NO.: 2:12-cv-187-FTM-99AEP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 28, 2012)

Citing Cases

Gaddy v. Sprague

See (Doc. No. 38 at 15-16). Thus, in addition to being Heck-barred, it appears that Plaintiff's claims here…