Smith v. Designated Hearings Officer Johnson et al, No. 6:2022cv00058 - Document 7 (D. Mont. 2022)
Court Description: ORDER 4 ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g). Any appeal from its disposition would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Brian Morris on 8/9/2022. Mailed to Smith (TAG)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Smith v. Designated Hearings Officer Johnson et al Doc. 7 Case 6:22-cv-00058-BMM Document 7 Filed 08/09/22 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA HELENA DIVISION JACOB SMITH, Cause no. CV 22-58-H-BMM-JTJ Plaintiff, vs. DESIGNATED HEARINGS OFFICE JOHNSON; ROXANNE WIGERT; WARDEN JAMES SALMONSEN; MDOC DIRECTOR BRIAN GOOTKIN, ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendants. United States Magistrate Judge John T. Johnston entered his Findings and Recommendations in this case on July 21, 2022. (Doc. 4.) Judge Johnston recommended that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 2) should be DISMISSED without further leave to amend for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted; that the docket should reflect that Smith’s filing of this action counts as one strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and that the District Court should CERTIFY that any appeal from its disposition would not be taken in good faith. On July 13, 2022, Plaintiff Jacob Smith moved to proceed in forma pauperis with this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of his civil rights. (Doc. 1.) The Court granted his motion (Doc. 4.) Smith filed his Complaint on July Dockets.Justia.com Case 6:22-cv-00058-BMM Document 7 Filed 08/09/22 Page 2 of 3 13, 2022 alleging that Defendant Wigert “fabricated” a disciplinary report against him in retaliation for his grievances and litigation activities. (Doc. 2 at ¶¶ 2–3; id. at 4 ¶ 7.) Smith also alleged that the hearings officer, Defendant Johnson, denied his due process right to call witnesses and examined evidence at Smith’s parole hearing in retaliation for his litigation activities. (Id. at ¶¶ 5-6.) Judge Johnston found that Smith failed Smith failed to allege facts supporting an inference that Wigert lacked a legitimate correctional goal in filing the report (Doc. 4 at 5.) Judge Johnston additionally found that Smith failed to support his claim that he was denied parole in retaliation for his litigation activities (Id.) Smith has not filed an objection to the Findings and Recommendations. The Court has reviewed Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations for clear error. McDonnel Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). This Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations and adopts them in full. IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 4) are ADOPTED IN FULL. 1. Smith’s Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED with prejudice. 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that Smith’s filing of this action counts as one strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Case 6:22-cv-00058-BMM Document 7 Filed 08/09/22 Page 3 of 3 3. The District Court should CERTIFY that any appeal from its disposition would not be taken in good faith. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter and enter judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. DATED this 9th day of August, 2022.
]]>
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.
