Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_05-cv-05119/USCOURTS-arwd-5_05-cv-05119-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

ROBERT LESLIE MEYER PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 05-5119

STATE OF ARKANSAS, 4th

Judicial District, Washington

County, Fayetteville, Arkansas DEFENDANT

O R D E R

Now on this 19 day of August, 2005, comes on for th

consideration the Report And Recommendation Of The Magistrate Judge

(document #4), and plaintiff’s Objections thereto (document #6),

and the Court, having carefully reviewed both documents, finds and

orders as follows:

1. Plaintiff contends that he is incarcerated pursuant to

a wrongful arrest for threatening a state judicial officer. He

asks this Court to get him “out of jail, out of this false

indictment and further harassment by local authorities,” and to

“reprimand and otherwise correct the officials involved.”

2. The Magistrate Judge reports that, to the extent

plaintiff seeks money damages, his claim is subject to dismissal on

the authority of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). She

further reports that to the extent plaintiff seeks injunctive

relief, the Court should abstain pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401

U.S. 37 (1971). She recommends that plaintiff’s claims be

dismissed.

3. Plaintiff objects that he has no access to a law library;

Case 5:05-cv-05119-JLH Document 7 Filed 08/19/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
-2-

that his “subsequent submissions” have not been considered; that he

does not understand some of the language in the Report And

Recommendation; and that he is not making a claim for money

damages. He asks that his case be remanded to the Magistrate Judge

for reconsideration, and that he be given access to a law library

and “an opportunity to restructure my suit with proper knowledge.”

4. With regard to plaintiff’s claims that he has not had

access to a law library, does not understand legal terminology, and

needs to “restructure” his claims, the Court observes that

plaintiff’s claims have been read liberally, as required of pro se

claims under Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972). The Court also

finds the legal principles upon which the Magistrate Judge based

her recommendations to be sound. Additional legal research and a

better understanding of legal terminology on the part of plaintiff

would not change the underlying nature of his claim, i.e., that he

has been wrongfully arrested and is being wrongfully prosecuted

under state criminal laws for letters he has written. Nor would it

change the settled law applicable to his situation. Younger

requires a federal court to abstain from hearing a case when it

involves an ongoing state judicial proceeding which implicates

important state interests and affords an adequate opportunity to

raise the type of federal questions presented by plaintiff in this

case. These objections are without merit.

5. With regard to plaintiff’s objection that his “subsequent

Case 5:05-cv-05119-JLH Document 7 Filed 08/19/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
-3-

submissions” have not been considered, the Court notes that

plaintiff appears to refer to letters he has sent to various people

and to other lawsuits he has filed. Such things do not constitute

either pleadings in this case, or evidence upon which this Court

might make a ruling in this case, and thus any failure to consider

them does not constitute a basis of error in the Report And

Recommendation.

6. Finally, with regard to plaintiff’s assertion that he

seeks only injunctive relief, not money damages, the Court accepts

this statement as a clarification of plaintiff’s pleadings, while

noting that it does not undermine the validity of the Report And

Recommendation.

7. There being no objection lodged which demonstrates any

insufficiency in the Report And Recommendation, and the Court

finding it in proper order,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report And Recommendation Of

The Magistrate Judge is adopted in toto.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the

Report And Recommendation Of The Magistrate Judge, plaintiff’s

claims are hereby dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ Jimm Larry Hendren 

JIMM LARRY HENDREN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:05-cv-05119-JLH Document 7 Filed 08/19/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>