Opinion
NO. 4:16-CV-00006-DMB-SAA
06-01-2016
DETRICK DEWAYNE HARRIS PLAINTIFF v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, et al. DEFENDANTS
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This § 1983 pro se prisoner complaint is before the Court for a sua sponte consideration of dismissal. "Both [28 U.S.C.] § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and § 1915A(b)(1) direct district courts to dismiss a complaint that is frivolous." Thompson v. Hayes, 542 F. App'x 420, 421 (5th Cir. 2013). Under § 1915(e)(2)(B), "[a] complaint containing both factual allegations and legal conclusions is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or fact." Alfred v. Corrections Corp. of Am., 437 F. App'x 281, 284 (5th Cir. 2011) (quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989)). Under this standard, "a court may dismiss a claim ... if the facts [alleged] are 'clearly baseless,' 'fanciful,' 'fantastic,' or 'delusional.'" Id. (quoting Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 34 (1992)). "District courts must construe in forma pauperis complaints liberally, particularly in the context of dismissals under § 1915(e)(2)(B), but are given broad discretion in determining when such complaints are frivolous." Hines v. Graham, 320 F.Supp.2d 511, 515 (N.D Tex. 2004) (citing Marcias v. Raul A. (Unknown) Badge No. 153, 23 F.3d 94, 97 (5th Cir. 1994)).
"[W]hen reviewing a complaint for possible dismissal as frivolous under § 1915A(b)(1), a federal court applies the same legal standard as that used to dismiss claims as frivolous under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)." Allen v. San Antonio Police Dep't, No. SA-14-CA-614, 2014 WL 4691967, at *3 (W.D. Tex. Sep. 18, 2014) (citing Morris v. McAllester, 702 F.3d 187, 189 (5th Cir. 2012)). --------
In this case, Harris' complaint alleges that the "Federal Government/'Nuclear Regulatory Committee'" and prison officials have, among other things: (1) allowed an "Instrument to approach [him] upon [his] left wrist area" and accuse him of offenses committed in Scott County, Mississippi, since 1993; (2) tampered with his left wrist with "nitrogen atoms" in a "cycle;" (3) placed a bar code on his wrist; and (4) tried to stop him "from receiving help for the Radiation Outbreak." Doc. #1 at 4, 7. After carefully considering the contents of the pro se complaint and giving it the liberal construction required, the Court concludes that Harris' allegations are clearly baseless, fanciful, fantastic, and/or delusional. Accordingly, the complaint will be DISMISSED. A final judgment consistent with this opinion will be entered today.
SO ORDERED, this 1st day of June, 2016.
/s/ Debra M. Brown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE