Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

White v. Ross

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division

January 4, 2018

CODY WHITE
v.
AARON ROSS, ET AL.

         SECTION P

          JUDGE ROBERT G. JAMES

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN L. HAYES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         The plaintiff, Cody White, filed this pro se and in forma pauperis complaint on August 18, 2017, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, while an inmate at the Franklin Parish Detention Center (FPDC). His complaint alleges constitutional violations against defendants Aaron Ross, Chad Lee, Sheriff Bobby and Nicole Fontenno. He seeks compensatory damages.

         This matter has been referred to the undersigned for review, report, and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the standing orders of the Court. For the following reasons it is recommended that the complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failing to state a claim for which relief may be granted.

         Statement of the Case

         On July 11, 2017, plaintiff was put in holding cell 304 at the FPDC. He complains that it is “so nasty it smells of urine, mold and mildew.” He has complained to Sgt. Aaron Ross, to no avail. He alleges that Warden Chad Lee won't allow the inmates to clean or go to commissary.

         Plaintiff also complains that his sentence is a form of cruel and unusual punishment. He was sentenced to fifteen years, nine of that suspended, on unknown charges. He served six years and was given three years probation, which he then violated. He asserts that the DOC has him serving fifteen years, as opposed to the nine that was suspended, because Nicole Fontenno will not send the Court papers to the DOC.

         Finally, plaintiff complains that St. Landry Parish Sheriff Bobby transferred him to Claiborne Parish, away from St. Landry Parish, to keep him from “doing anything” on his case.

         Law and Analysis

          1. Screening

         Plaintiff is a prisoner who has been permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. As a prisoner seeking redress from an officer or employee of a governmental entity, his complaint is subject to preliminary screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See Martin v. Scott, 156 F.3d 578, 579-80 (5th Cir.1998) (per curiam). Because he is proceeding in forma pauperis, his complaint is also subject to screening under § 1915(e)(2). Both § 1915(e)(2) (B) and § 1915A(b) provide for sua sponte dismissal of the complaint, or any portion thereof, if the Court finds it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

         A complaint is frivolous when it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). A claim lacks an arguable basis in law when it is “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory.” Id. at 327. A complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it fails to plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); accord Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

         2. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.