Case ID: f-appx_390/html/0960-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charlie ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Walter McNeil, James Crosby, Former, Secretary Department of Corrections, Orlester Dickens, Secretary’s Representative, Monica David, Commissioner/Chairman, Tena M. Pate, Commissioner/Vice Chairman, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    
      No. 10-11389
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Aug. 5, 2010.
    Charlie Robinson, Holly Hill, FL, pro se.
    Bill McCollum, Office of the Attorney General, Daytona Beach, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Charlie Robinson appeals pro se the dismissal of his second complaint that employees of the Florida Department of Corrections and the Florida Parole Commission violated his constitutional rights by denying him “gain time” after the revocation of his controlled release. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We affirm.

The district court did not err when it dismissed Robinson’s second complaint. Although Robinson did not request damages in his first complaint, his second complaint “ ‘arises out of the same nucleus of operative facts, or is based upon the same factual predicate, as [his] former action.” Griswold v. Cnty. of Hillsborough, 598 F.3d 1289, 1293 (11th Cir.2010) (quoting Ragsdale v. Rubbermaid, Inc., 193 F.3d 1235, 1239 (11th Cir.1999)). Robinson’s complaint is barred by res judicata.

We AFFIRM the dismissal of Robinson’s complaint.