United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
OPINION AND ORDER
A. White United States District Judge.
a pro se prisoner who is incarcerated in the Carter County
Jail in Ardmore, Oklahoma, brings this action under the
authority of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He is seeking termination
of his drug court sentence with time served, as well as
monetary relief for alleged constitutional violations related
to his criminal proceedings in Carter County District Court
No. CF-2013-645. Plaintiff complains of the following
unconstitutional acts: “Cruel and unusual Punishment,
unfair and imparcial Judgement Bias and Predjudice acts pain
and suffering, wrongful imprisoment and Double Jepeordy while
being discriminated against.” (Dkt. 1 at 3) (errors in
defendants are Thomas K. Baldwin, Carter County Associate
District Judge and Drug Court Judge; Heather Cooper and Ryan
Hunnicutt, Carter County Assistant District Attorneys;
Melonie Blackburn, Defense Counsel; Danny Powell, Carter
County Drug Court Coordinator; Debra Washington, Assistant
Drug Court Coordinator; and the Carter County Clerk's
prisoner files a civil rights complaint seeking relief from a
governmental entity or an officer of employee of a
[T]he court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the
complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a)-(b). See also 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (dismissal standards for prisoners
proceeding in forma pauperis).
pleading standard for all civil actions was articulated in
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007).
See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 684 (2009). To
avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim under
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), a complaint must present factual
allegations, assumed to be true, that “raise a right to
relief above the speculative level.” Twombly,
550 U.S. at 555. The complaint must contain “enough
facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.” Id. at 570. A court must accept all the
well-pleaded allegations of the complaint as true, even if
doubtful in fact, and must construe the allegations in the
light most favorable to the plaintiff. Id. at
555-56. “So, when the allegations in a complaint,
however true, could not raise a claim of entitlement to
relief, ” the cause of action should be dismissed.
Id. at 558. The Court applies the same standard of
review for dismissals under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) that is employed for Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6)
motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Kay v.
Bemis, 500 F.3d 1214, 1217-18 (10th Cir. 2007).
se plaintiff's complaint must be broadly construed under
this standard. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94
(2007); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972).
The generous construction given to the pro se litigant's
allegations, however, “does not relieve the plaintiff
of the burden of alleging sufficient facts on which a
recognized legal claim could be based.” Hall v.
Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991).
Notwithstanding a pro se plaintiff's various mistakes or
misunderstandings of legal doctrines or procedural
requirements, “if a court can reasonably read the
pleadings to state a valid claim on which the plaintiff could
prevail, it should do so . . . .” Id. A
reviewing court need not accept “mere conclusions
characterizing pleaded facts.” Bryson v. City of
Edmond, 905 F.2d 1386, 1390 (10th Cir. 1990).
“While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion
to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, a
plaintiff's obligation to provide the grounds of his
entitlement to relief requires more than labels and
conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a
cause of action will not do.” Twombly, 550
U.S. at 555 (quotations and citations omitted). The Court
“will not supply additional factual allegations to
round out a plaintiff's complaint or construct a legal
theory on a plaintiff's behalf.” Whitney v. New
Mexico, 113 F.3d 1170, 1173-74 (10th Cir. 1997).
for Release from Custody
addition to monetary damages, Plaintiff is asking to have his
drug court sentence terminated with time served.
Plaintiff's sentence, however, cannot be altered through
a civil rights action. Such challenges to sentencing must be
addressed through a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.