Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Foggy v. Fisher

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

May 8, 2017

DELAWRENCE FOGGY #B84899, Plaintiff,
v.
AMANDA FISHER, GREG NESTER, CAHOKIA POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          J. PHIL GILBERT United States District Judge

         Plaintiff DeLawrence Foggy, an inmate in Western Illinois Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and release from prison. Plaintiff's claims stem from an incident on August 1, 2013 wherein Plaintiff fled from officers working for the Cahokia Police Department and his subsequent prosecution for offenses related to that incident. In connection with these claims, Plaintiff sues Amanda Fisher (prosecutor), Greg Nester (public defender), and the Cahokia Police Department. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and release from prison.

         This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:

(a) Screening - The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for Dismissal - On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint-
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

         An action or claim is frivolous if “it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Frivolousness is an objective standard that refers to a claim that any reasonable person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (7th Cir. 2000). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The claim of entitlement to relief must cross “the line between possibility and plausibility.” Id. at 557. At this juncture, the factual allegations of the pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).

         This action does not survive preliminary review under the above standard.

         The Complaint

         The constitutional violations alleged in the Complaint stem from an incident on August 1, 2013 wherein Plaintiff fled from officers working for the Cahokia Police Department. (Doc. 1, p. 5). According to the Complaint, On August 1, 2013, Plaintiff was driving in his vehicle when a Cahokia police officer pulled him over. Id. When the officer approached Plaintiff's vehicle, Plaintiff drove away. Id. Plaintiff drove away because he had previously experienced racial profiling and feared for his life. Id. During the pursuit, the Cahokia Police Department put spikes in the road, causing Plaintiff's vehicle to flip. Id. Plaintiff was taken to the hospital and subsequently transferred to the county jail. Id. Sometime after fleeing from police, Plaintiff was arrested and prosecuted in relation to the incident or incidents that occurred on August 1, 2013. (Doc. 1, pp. 5-6).

         In connection with his arrest and prosecution for the events occurring on August 1, 2013, Plaintiff contends the Cahokia Police Department submitted a police report that contained falsehoods. (Doc. 1, p. 5). Plaintiff contends that Fisher, the prosecutor handling his case, lied to the Court in connection with his prosecution. (Doc. 1, p. 6). As such, Plaintiff contends his prosecution was bogus, malicious, and premised on racial discrimination. Id. Plaintiff additionally alleges that his public defender, Nester, violated his constitutional rights by failing to properly investigate his case. Id.

         Plaintiff does not state the crime for which he was convicted or the date of his conviction. However, as noted above, Plaintiff alleges his constitutional claims relate to an incident or incidents occurring on August 1, 2013 wherein Plaintiff fled from police officers working for the Cahokia Police Department. According to the publically-accessible internet website maintained by the Illinois Department of Corrections and St. Clair County court records, [1] Plaintiff is currently serving sentences on three St. Clair County convictions for resisting a peace officer, aggravated battery/peace officer, and aggravated fleeing subsequent offense. These three convictions relate to conduct that occurred on August 1, 2013 (identified as the date of offense) involving the Cahokia Police Department (identified as the arresting agency). See St. Clair County Circuit Court No. 13-cf-1192.[2]

         Discussion

         The Court finds it convenient to divide the pro se action into three counts. The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. Any other claim that is mentioned in the Complaint but not addressed in this Order should be ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.