DeLacruz v. Wallace et al, No. 7:2014cv02200 - Document 9 (N.D. Ala. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 8/26/15. (SAC )
DeLacruz v. Wallace et al Doc. 9 FILED 2015 Aug-26 PM 04:32 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN DIVISION HUGO LOPEZ DELACRUZ, Plaintiff, v. STEPHEN C. WALLACE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 7:14-cv-02200-KOB-JEO ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on July 6, 2015, recommending that this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. 8). No party has filed any objections. Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and ACCEPTS his recommendation. The Plaintiff claims that the affidavits attested to by Defendant Cotton to obtain the warrants were invalid because Cotton was not present at the scene of the shooting. However, the law does not require that Cotton be present at the scene of the shooting or have personal knowledge of the facts for his affidavits in support of the warrants to be valid. See United States v. Flynn, 664 F.2d 1296, 1303 (11th Cir. 1982) (citing United States v. Hayles, 471 F.2d 788 (5th Cir. Dockets.Justia.com 1973)). As explained in the report and recommendation, the Plaintiff does not allege that Cotton signed the affidavits for the warrants knowing they were false or with reckless disregard for whether they were false. Accordingly, the court finds that the complaint is due to be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The court will enter a Final Judgment by separate Order. DONE and ORDERED this 26th day of August, 2015. ____________________________________ KARON OWEN BOWDRE CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Terms of Service