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.

Stout v. Unknown Party Wardens 1-3

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

July 19, 2017

GREG STOUT, # Y19267, Plaintiff,
v.
UNKNOWN PARTY Wardens 1-3, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          MICHAEL J. REAGAN Chief Judge United States District Court.

         Plaintiff Greg Stout, currently incarcerated at Pinckneyville Correctional Center (“Pinckneyville”), has brought this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that Defendants unlawfully held him in prison past his release date. (Doc. 1). 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).

         After fully considering the allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint, the Court concludes that this action is subject to summary dismissal.

         The Complaint

         On January 17, 2017, Plaintiff was sentenced for several crimes to 3 years in prison with a 1-year period of MSR (commonly referred to as parole), 3 years in prison with 1 year MSR, and 3 years in prison with 2 years MSR, to run concurrently. (Doc. 1, p. 5). The judge also allegedly found that Plaintiff was entitled to receive credit for time served in custody, at 251 days, 27 days, and 173 days for each respective offense, for a total of 451 days. Id. Plaintiff claims his release date should have been April 24, 2017[1] based on the court's sentencing order, but he has been unconstitutionally held past that date. (Doc. 1, p. 6). Plaintiff claims this violates his due process and Eighth Amendment rights. Id. At the time he filed this action on June 13, 2017, he claims he had been “held unconstitutionally” for almost two months. Id.

         As relief, Plaintiff seeks immediate release from prison, as well as compensation for the each day he spent in prison after his release date. (Doc. 1, pp. 6-7).

         Discussion

         Based on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court shall characterize the pro se action in a single count. The parties and the Court will use this designation in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. The designation of this count does not constitute an opinion as to its merit. Any other claim that is mentioned in the Complaint but not addressed in this Order should be considered dismissed without prejudice.

         Count 1: Defendants wrongfully incarcerated Plaintiff past his release date in violation of the ...


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.