From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weaver v. BB&T Mortg.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jun 8, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-mc-00067-LTB (D. Colo. Jun. 8, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-mc-00067-LTB

06-08-2012

MARK WEAVER, TIFFANY WEAVER, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiffs, v. BB&T MORTGAGE, ROBERT J. HOPP & ASSOCIATES/THE HOPP LAW FIRM, ROBERT J. HOPP, ESQ., #26818, NEAL J. VALORZ, ESQ., #42496, NATHAN S. SILVER, ESQ., #28836, ANNA MARIA PETERS-RUDDICK, Arapahoe County Public Trustee, Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiffs, Mark Weaver and Tiffany Weaver, initiated this action by filing a "Criminal Complaint & Demand for Trial by Jury" (ECF No. 1) for money damages with the Court on June 4, 2012, against various Defendants allegedly involved in foreclosure and/or eviction proceedings against Plaintiffs. Although listed as a Plaintiff, the United States is not a party to this lawsuit.

The Court must construe Plaintiffs' filing liberally because they are representing themselves. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). However, the Court should not be the pro se litigants' advocate. Hall, 935 F.2d at 1110. For the reasons stated below, this miscellaneous criminal action will be dismissed.

"A private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another." Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973). See also Keyter v. 535 Members of 110th Congress, 277 F. App'x. 825, 827 (10th Cir. 2008); Cok v. Cosentino, 876 F.2d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co., 457 F.2d 81, 86-87 (2d Cir. 1972) ("It is a truism, and has been for many decades, that in our federal system crimes are always prosecuted by the Federal Government, not as has sometimes been done in Anglo-American jurisdictions by private complaints."); Winslow v. Romer, 759 F. Supp. 670, 673 (D. Colo. 1991) ("Private citizens generally have no standing to institute federal criminal proceedings."). Therefore, the Court finds that Mark Weaver and Tiffany Weaver lack standing to invoke the authority of United States attorneys under 28 U.S.C. § 547 to prosecute for offenses against the United States. Moreover, Plaintiffs cannot recover civil damages for alleged criminal violations. See, e.g., Shaw v. Neece, 727 F.2d 947, 949 (10th Cir. 1984).

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that this miscellaneous criminal action is dismissed because Plaintiffs, Mark Weaver and Tiffany Weaver, lack standing to file a criminal action.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 8th day of June, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

_____________________________

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Weaver v. BB&T Mortg.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jun 8, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-mc-00067-LTB (D. Colo. Jun. 8, 2012)
Case details for

Weaver v. BB&T Mortg.

Case Details

Full title:MARK WEAVER, TIFFANY WEAVER, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiffs, v…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Jun 8, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-mc-00067-LTB (D. Colo. Jun. 8, 2012)