Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-2_09-cv-01358/USCOURTS-alnd-2_09-cv-01358-0/pdf.json

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

---

Reference to a document number, [“Doc. ___”], refers to the number assigned to each

1

document as it is filed in the court’s record.

 Plaintiff, in his October 16, 2009 letters, does not address themagistrate judge’s Report and 2

Recommendation, but instead reiterates arguments and raises new issues. (See Doc. 9; Doc. 10.)

However, the filing of objections is not a proper vehicle for either. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (“A

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

GARY KEITH WHITE,

Plaintiff,

v.

BLOUNT COUNTY SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT, and SHERIFF

DANNY MORTON,

Defendants.

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

CASE NO. 2:09-cv-1358-SLB-RRA

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 13, 2009, the magistrate judge filed a Report and Recommendation,

recommending that plaintiff Gary Keith White’s (the “Plaintiff”) pro se Complaint, filed

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and/or (2) as

frivolous, failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and/or seeking monetary

relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. (Doc. 8 at 2-3.) In the Report and 1

Recommendation, the magistrate judge informed Plaintiff that he “may file specific written

objections to this report and recommendation within fifteen (15) days from the date it is filed

in the office of the Clerk.” (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff filed two letters on October 16, 2009, (Doc.

9; Doc. 10), an Objection to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation on October 2

FILED

 2010 Mar-24 PM 12:08

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:09-cv-01358-SLB -RRA Document 14 Filed 03/24/10 Page 1 of 3
judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified

proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”); Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d

776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993) (noting that “[b]ecause [the pro se prisoner] did not file specific

objections to factual findings by the magistrate judge, there was no requirement that the district court

de novo review those findings” (citing Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992))).

 As with Plaintiff’s October 16, 2009 letters, Plaintiff, in his November 12, 2009 and 3

December 23, 2009 letters, likewise does not address the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation, but instead restates previous allegations and raises new claims regarding the

conditions of confinement and medical treatment. See supra note 2.

 Also in his October 19, 2009 Objection, Plaintiff raises new claims against defendants 4

Blount County Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Danny Morton, and presents additional evidence

including court request forms, inmate request forms, and letters from witnesses alleging Plaintiff’s

innocence. (See Doc. 11 at 2.) Still, the filing of objections is again not a proper vehicle for alleging

new claims or presenting additional evidence. See supra note 2.

2

19, 2009, (Doc. 11), a letter requesting a bond reduction on November 12, 2009, (Doc. 12),

and a separate letter for bail on December 23, 2009, (Doc. 13). In his October 19, 2009 3

Objection to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff repeats his claim

that his bond is excessive, declares his innocence on all charges, clarifies his previous

allegations against defendants Blount County Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Danny

Morton, and refiles previous motions. (See Doc. 11.) 4

Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file,

including the Report and Recommendation and objections thereto, the court finds that the

magistrate judge’s Report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the Recommendation

is ACCEPTED. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Complaint is due to be dismissed pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(b) as frivolous, failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,

Case 2:09-cv-01358-SLB -RRA Document 14 Filed 03/24/10 Page 2 of 3
 Plaintiff has previously filed suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against, inter alia,

5

defendants Blount County Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff Danny Morton, likewise alleging

excessive bail and false charges. See White v. Sherbert, No. 2:08-cv-02342-KOB-RRA (N.D. Ala.

June 24, 2009). The court dismissed the case as frivolous. See id. Similarly, on December 8, 2008,

Plaintiff filed suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against his former attorney for allowing a witness

to testify against him. See White v. King, No. 2:08-cv-02275-KOB (N.D. Ala. Mar. 31, 2009). That

case was also dismissed as frivolous. See id. The court notified Plaintiff in both cases that the

dismissal of the action was countable for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That section states that:

In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action

or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions,

while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court

of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious,

or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury.

§ 1915(g).

3

and seeking monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. A Final 5

Judgment will be entered contemporaneously.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to provide a copy of this Memorandum

Opinion to Plaintiff at the following address:

Gary Keith White

Blount County Jail

225 Industrial Park Road

Oneonta, AL 35121

DONE, this 24th day of March, 2010.

 

SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:09-cv-01358-SLB -RRA Document 14 Filed 03/24/10 Page 3 of 3