HARRIS v. INDIANA PAROLE BOARD et al, No. 1:2021cv00956 - Document 27 (S.D. Ind. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT - Plaintiff Bradley J. Harris initiated this action alleging that various persons and entities had violated his Fifth Amendment rights by punishing him for refusing to admit guilt to a sex offense for which he was convicted and sentenced to prison. Dkt. 1 (complaint); dkt. 14 (amended complaint). The Court notified Mr. Harris that he could proceed only on his claim for injunctive relief, dkt. 15 , and Mr. Harris notified the Cou rt that he would proceed only on that claim, dkt. 16 . This case is now proceeding only on Mr. Harris's claim that Indiana Parole District #7 was violating the Fifth Amendment by subjecting him to polygraph examinations because he refused to co nfess to the crimes underlying his conviction. Dkt. 17 . But now Mr. Harris is back in prison, see dkt. 19 , where Indiana Parole District #7 has no authority to subject him to polygraph examinations. The Court directed Mr. Harris to show cause wh y this action should not be dismissed as moot. Mr. Harris responded, arguing that he was arrested and brought back into custody either in retaliation for filing this lawsuit or because he refused to admit guilt to the sex offense for which he was convicted. Dkt. 26 ; see also dkt. 25 (motion to supplement claims). But this is an altogether different set of allegations than the one he is currently litigating in this case. Because Mr. Harris has failed to show that his current claim is not moot, this action is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Harris's motion to supplement claims, dkt. 25 , and his motion to proceed in this action, dkt. 26 , are DENIED. Mr. Harris's request for copies, dkt. 25 , is also DENIED. The C ourt has already provided copies of the docket sheet in this action, his amended complaint, the Court's most recent screening order, and the defendant's answer. See dkt. 24 . Nothing in this Order will prevent Mr. Harris from bringing a new action based on the events surrounding his arrest in November 2021. Final judgment shall now enter. Copies sent pursuant to distribution list. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/25/2022. (AKH)

Download PDF
HARRIS v. INDIANA PAROLE BOARD et al Doc. 27 Case 1:21-cv-00956-TWP-DML Document 27 Filed 02/25/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 171 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION BRADLEY J. HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. INDIANA PAROLE DISTRICT #7, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1:21-cv-00956-TWP-DML ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT Plaintiff Bradley J. Harris ("Mr. Harris") initiated this action alleging that various persons and entities had violated his Fifth Amendment rights by punishing him for refusing to admit guilt to a sex offense for which he was convicted and sentenced to prison. Dkt. 1 (complaint); dkt. 14 (amended complaint). The Court notified Mr. Harris that he could proceed only on his claim for injunctive relief, dkt. 15, and Mr. Harris notified the Court that he would proceed only on that claim, dkt. 16. This case is now proceeding only on Mr. Harris's claim that Indiana Parole District #7 was violating the Fifth Amendment by subjecting him to polygraph examinations because he refused to confess to the crimes underlying his conviction. Dkt. 17. But now Mr. Harris is back in prison, see dkt. 19, where Indiana Parole District #7 has no authority to subject him to polygraph examinations. The Court directed Mr. Harris to show cause why this action should not be dismissed as moot. Mr. Harris responded, arguing that he was arrested and brought back into custody either in retaliation for filing this lawsuit or because he refused to admit guilt to the sex offense for which he was convicted. Dkt. 26; see also dkt. 25 (motion to supplement claims). But this is an altogether different set of allegations than the one he is currently litigating in this case. Because Mr. Harris Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:21-cv-00956-TWP-DML Document 27 Filed 02/25/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 172 has failed to show that his current claim is not moot, this action is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Harris's motion to supplement claims, dkt. [25], and his motion to proceed in this action, dkt. [26], are DENIED. Mr. Harris's request for copies, dkt. [25], is also DENIED. The Court has already provided copies of the docket sheet in this action, his amended complaint, the Court's most recent screening order, and the defendant's answer. See dkt. 24. Nothing in this Order will prevent Mr. Harris from bringing a new action based on the events surrounding his arrest in November 2021. Final judgment shall now enter. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 2/25/2022 Distribution: BRADLEY J. HARRIS NEW CASTLE - CF NEW CASTLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY - Inmate Mail/Parcels 1000 Van Nuys Road NEW CASTLE, IN 47362 Thomas Joseph Flynn INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL tom.flynn@atg.in.gov

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 Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.