Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00267/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00267-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 In this filing, Mr. Caston claims to be the son of Elijah Muhammad, the named

Plaintiff herein. Doc. #5, page 4.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Elijah Muhammad (a/k/a Charles

Muhammad); et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

Phoenix Police Department; et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-267-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Pending before this Court is Plaintiff’s seeming request for a domestic violence

restraining order against the Phoenix Police Department (Doc. #5). This Court does not have

jurisdiction to enter “injunction and forfeiture for civil and criminal activity and seizure to

prevent domestic violence” against the Phoenix Police Department. Therefore this request

will be denied. This request will be denied for the additional reason that it is filed by

“Charles Caston” who, as far as the Court can tell, is not a party to this case.1

Additionally, pending before this Court is a request to proceed in forma pauperis filed

by Charles Caston. From this pleading it would appear that Charles Caston is an aka of

Elijah Muhammad, though there is no indication of this alias in the original complaint. In

determining whether in forma pauperis status is appropriate, the Court may screen the

Case 2:08-cv-00267-JAT Document 6 Filed 02/14/08 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 2 -

complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

Congress provided with respect to in forma pauperis cases that a district court

"shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines" that the "allegation

of poverty is untrue" or that the "action or appeal" is "frivolous or malicious,"

"fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted," or "seeks monetary

relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2). While much of section 1915 outlines how prisoners can file

proceedings in forma pauperis, section 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis

proceedings, not just those filed by prisoners. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,

1127 (9th Cir. 2000)("section 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis

complaints"). "It is also clear that section 1915(e) not only permits but

requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to

state a claim." Id. Therefore, this court must dismiss an in forma pauperis

complaint if it fails to state a claim or if it is frivolous or malicious. 

"[A] complaint, containing both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is

frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v.

Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Furthermore, "a finding of factual

frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the

irrational or wholly incredible, whether or not there are judicially recognized

facts available to contradict them." Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33

(1992). "A case is malicious if it was filed with the intention or desire to harm

another." Andrews v. King, 398 F.3d 1113, 1121 (9th Cir. 2005). 

Kennedy v. Andrews, 2005 WL 3358205, *2 (D. Ariz. 2005).

In this case, the complaint states in total: “The Defendant violated the Fourth

Amendment. The Defendant violated the Fifth Amendment. The Defendant violated the

Sixth Amendment. The Defendant violated the Eighth Amendment.” This complaint is

insufficient to state a claim. Specifically,

[A] plaintiff's obligation to provide the “grounds” of his “entitle[ment] to

relief” requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation

of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan v. Allain, 478

U.S. 265, 286 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts “are not bound to accept

as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation”). Factual allegations

must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 C.

Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d

ed.2004) (hereinafter Wright & Miller) (“[T]he pleading must contain

something more ... than ... a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion

[of] a legally cognizable right of action”)... .

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964 -65 (2007).

In this case, no facts are alleged as to any of the five named plaintiffs or any of the 17

named defendants. Thus, it fails to state a claim. Additionally, this complaint is signed by

“Charles X” who is not listed as a party above. Finally, assuming Charles is not a lawyer,

Case 2:08-cv-00267-JAT Document 6 Filed 02/14/08 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 3 -

he can not represent any of the other plaintiffs before this Court. See Pope Equity Trust v.

U.S., 818 F.2d 696, 697-98 (9th Cir. 1987). 

Normally, at this point, the Court would give Charles an opportunity to amend to

attempt to cure his failure to state a claim. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1128-29 (9th Cir.

2000). However, as indicated above, this Court can dismiss a complaint when Plaintiff’s

allegations are in the category of "the irrational or wholly incredible." See Denton v.

Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992) (dismissal also appropriate when the facts alleged are

"clearly baseless," "fanciful," "fantastic," and/or "delusional."). In his “Injunction and

forfeiture for civil and criminal activity and seizure to prevent domestic violence,” Charles

Caston (which may or may not be an aka of Elijah Muhammad):

The U.S. secret service are hiding behind the Phoenix Police, I have a

computer chip which controls my nine major organs, penis, colon, heart, brain

eyes, kidney, hearing, memory, they burn my feet, make my hear [sic] hurt,

make me piss my self; shit on myself!?

Doc. #5, page 4. The filing also says,

I have been stalked raped, attacked by the U.S. Reserves, protected by the

Police of this country, I was beat down in Sacramento, I was forced out of Las

Vegas, my apartment was broken into 20 times in four months I was kidnapped

28 times in Las Vegas, I an Elijah Muhammad’s son, he was a trillionaire, I am

homeless. I have had U.S. Secret Service Protection all my life, I wrote one

page restraining for the police, it was stolen in Las Vegas, I wanted $1000.00

for its use with permission, $10,000.00 if stolen.

Id.

With these types of allegations underlying the very general allegations in the

complaint, the Court finds this case to be premised on facts which are fanciful, fantastic and

delusional. See Denton, 504 U.S. at 33. Accordingly, leave to amend will not be granted.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion filed at Doc. #5 is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc.

#4) is denied.

/ / /

Case 2:08-cv-00267-JAT Document 6 Filed 02/14/08 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 4 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint in this case is dismissed and the

Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.

DATED this 13th day of February, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00267-JAT Document 6 Filed 02/14/08 Page 4 of 4