Martin v. Metropolitan Police Department et al
Filing
6
ORDER that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for the failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Brian E. Sandoval on 4/29/2009. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KL)
<![CDATA[
T%
r- -r kg' gg ;
.
(yyj rjjj .
-. j : ty ë. ); k(
ut .
E'I- E l 'F : .E ,
(l Nî! ..Ir(,g'Fgy j : t q ' q(!.! j y tl ; t Lq . t
l
j
'
ï 2 S zgg ; g
.:
2
4
5
3
t-ri :r' ?.7iu . u': ',q .' ! à t -: ' r s r .'t tt , '
:zitfJ r',A ) i/ t ïfl ) . F lh t
-. . .
-
?ëFïT Y
6
U N I E D STA T E S D I T R I T C O U R T T S C
7
8
D I T R I T O F N EV A D A S C
9 CO LLI MARTI , S N
1 0
11 vs.
Plit t ani f
Ca e No. 08 CV- 01 3- ES-VPC) s 3: - 0 3 B (
O RD ER
1 JO H N DO E,etaI, 2 . 1 3
l4
Def ndant . e s
1 5
1 7
Th Cou t sr viwedPlit f CiiRih sComplitPur u n t 4zU. . . 1 83 e r ha e e ani s vl g t f a n s a to SC j 9
W hen a ' rsonerseek r dr ss fom a gover m ent l i orofierorem plyee of di p se e r n a entt y f c o
1 and fnds t att i acton m us be di m ised. 6 i h hs i t ss
18 a gover m ent l i j t e Coud m ust'dentf cogni abl cl i s ordim is t e com pl i t n a ent y ' h t' i iy z e am ssh an,
1 oran podi n o t e c m pait it e c m plit( )i fiolu ,mal ius o f i t sat a 9 y o f h o l n ,f h o a n 1 s r o s v i o , r al o t e c s 2 cai uponwhc r l fmaybe gr n e ' ( )s ek mon t r r l f r m a de en an who 0 lm ih e i e a t d, 2 e s or e a y e i fo e fd t 21 i i m un fom s ch r l t' 28 U. . ,j 191 A( ) Rul 1 ( )6)o t e F der lRues o sm e r u ei ' e SC 5 b. e 2b( fh e a l f
22 Cii Pr cedur pr vi es f rdi m isalofa com pl i tf rf i r t s at a cl i upon w hi h vl o e od o s s an o al e o t e u am c
2 r l f n b gr n ed.Re iw un er e 1 ( )6)i es en il ar l gona qu s ino Iw . 3 ei ca e a t e ve d Rul 2 b ( s s t l u i ay n e to fa 2 NorhSt rIt r . Ar on Cor . 4 t a n e n v. i a p Comm' , 0 F. d57 , 80( t Ci. 98 ) I c n ier g z n 72 2 8 5 9 h r 1 3 . n o sd i n
25 whet er t e pl i t f has st t d a cl i upon w hi h r l f can be gr nt d,aI m at ral hh an i f ae am c ei e ae I ei 26 al gatons i t e com pl i tar accept d as tue and ar t be cons r ed i t e I htm ost li e nh an e e r eo tu n h i g
2 f v r bl t t e pait f Ru s l v L n r u,621 F.d 1 3 , 1 3 ( t Ci. 1 8 ) 7 a o a e o h l n i, s e l . a d i f e 2 0 7 0 9 9h r 9 0 .
28
1 Al gatons ofa pr se com pl i antar hel t I sssti gents andar st an f r al eadi gs li e o an e doe rn t d h o m pl n
2 dr fe b lwyer . Haiesv. n r 404 U. . 9, 0 ( 972 ( ercu i m) a td y a s n Ker e , S 51 52 1 ) p ra .
3 The Com pl i tcont i s t o count , I Count1 Pl i tl al ges t athi conviton f r an an w sn , ani l e hs ci o
4 gr nd Ir enyi ival becauset evale oft e i m st athest l i lsst an$250, hat a ac sn i d h u ht eh oe s e h butt
5 t e pr secuton iegal i cl ded t e sal s t x t i cr ase t e val e t gr at rt an $250. ho i l lnu ly h e a on e h u o eeh
6 Regar l ss ofwhet erPl itf seeks m onet r dam ages ora r ver alofhi conviton,hi de h a n if ay es s ci s 7 sol f der l em edy i t r ugh a petton f ra wrtofhabeas cor us.Heckv.Hum nhr v, ee ar s ho ii o i p e 512
8 U. . 486 87( 99 ) Pr ier . S 477, - 1 4 . es v Rodr ue , 1U. . 500( 9 3) I Coun I, ait f , i z 41 S 475, o 1 7 .n tIPl n i f
9 cl i st athi st t - oud habeas cor us petton was dim i sed afera hearng atwhi h he am h s ae c p ii ss t i c 1 was notpr sent Eror i t e s at - oud postconviton pr cedur ar notaddr ssabl i 0 e . r s n h t ec ci o ee e en
1 f d r l oud. Fr nz nv.Brn m an, 77 F, d 2 , 6 ( t Ci.1 8 ) 1 e ea c ae ik 8 2 6 2 9h r 9 9 .
1 2
I I THEREFORE ORDERED t a t i aci ni Dl M l sED wih u prj dief rhe TS h ths t s s s o to t eu c o t
1 f i r t st t a cl i upon w hi h r l fm ay be gr nt d. The Cl r oft e Cour shalent r 3 al e o ae u am c ei e ae ek h t le
1 j dgm en ac or igl. 4u t c dn y
1 5
16
DATE D :Thi 29t day ofA prl 2009. sh i,
1 7
18
1 9
20 21
Uni d St t s DititJudge t e a e s rc
22
23
24 25
26 27 28
-
2-
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
