Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

CURTIS LEON DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00095-MP-AK

SADIE DARNELL, et al,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

Plaintiff, an inmate at Santa Rosa Correctional Institution, initiated this case by filing a

pro se Civil Rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1) and a motion for leave to

proceed as a pauper (Doc. 2). The Complaint concerns an alleged fabrication of evidence by

Defendant Zingg that resulted in Plaintiff’s arrest and these charges were “nolle prossed.” 

Although Plaintiff sues five Defendants, he alleges facts concerning Zingg only. 

Plaintiffs’ motion to proceed as a pauper (Doc. 2), is GRANTED to the extent that the

case may proceed without the prepayment of the entire filing fee. Because Plaintiff has

insufficient funds, the Court will not require Plaintiff to pay an initial partial filing fee as

provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)(A). However, Plaintiff is hereby assessed the total $350.00

filing fee in this case.

As funds become available in Plaintiff's prison account, he shall be required to make

monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding month's income (that is, all funds

deposited into the account) credited to the account. Upon receipt of this Order, the agency

having custody of Plaintiff shall forward payments from Plaintiff's account on a monthly basis to
Page 2 of 5

Case No: 1:10-cv-00095-MP-AK

the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00. These payments shall

continue until the filing fee of $350.00 is paid in full. The following information shall either be

included on the face of the check from the penal institution, cashier's check, or money order or

attached thereto: (1) the full name of the prisoner; (2) the prisoner's inmate number (#); and, (3)

Northern District of Florida Case Number (Case No. 1:10cv95-MP/AK). Checks or money

orders which do not have this information will be subject to return. Accordingly, the Clerk shall

mail a copy of this Order by mail to: Department of Corrections, Office of the General

Counsel, 2601 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2500.

Plaintiff is warned that he is ultimately responsible for payment of the filing fee if the

agency with custody over him/her lapses in its duty to make payments on his/her behalf. For this

reason, if Plaintiff is transferred to another jail or institution, Plaintiff should ensure that the new

institution is informed about this lawsuit and the required monthly payments as set out herein. 

Plaintiff is advised to retain a copy of this Order for this purpose.

AMENDMENT OF COMPLAINT

Pursuant to the Prison Litigation and Reform Act, the Court shall dismiss a case if the

Court determines that the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief

can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 

See 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b)(1). Additionally, the Court must read Plaintiff’s pro se allegations in a

liberal fashion. 

As the Court stated above, Plaintiff cites facts alleging that Defendant Zingg fabricated

evidence against him resulting in his arrest, but the charges were allegedly resolved in his favor. 

He has attached a Case Action Report dated January 14, 2009, that indicates that charges were

dismissed in a case against him. Plaintiff claims that Zingg falsified legal documents to obtain a
Page 3 of 5

Case No: 1:10-cv-00095-MP-AK

search warrant. Plaintiff does not state what legal documents he is referring to or how they were

falsified. However, where the decision to issue a warrant is put to an intermediate such as a

magistrate or a grand jury, “the intermediate's decision breaks the causal chain and insulates an

initiating party” [Defendants] from liability for a constitutional violation arising out of the arrest. 

Rodriguez, 556 F.2d at 1193. “The intervening acts of the prosecutor, grand jury, judge and

jury...each break the chain of causation unless Plaintiff can show that these intervening acts were

the result of deception or undue pressure by the defendant law policemen.” Barts v. Joyner, 865

F.2d 1187, 1195 (11th Cir. 1989). 

Further, the existence of probable cause is an absolute bar to a section 1983 suit for false

arrest. Rankin v. Evans, 133 F.3d 1425, 1435 (11th Cir. 1998); Ortega v. Christian, 85 F.3d

1521, 1525 (11th Cir. 1996); Marx v. Gumbinner, 905 F.2d 1503, 1506 (11th Cir. 1990). See also

Kingsland v. City of Miami, 2004 WL 1050743 (11th Cir. (Fla)). The standard for determining

whether probable cause exists in the Eleventh Circuit is the same standard under Florida and

federal law -whether “ ‘a reasonable man would have believed [probable cause existed] had he

known all of the facts known by the officer.’ “ United States v. Ullrich, 580 F.2d 765, 769 (5th

Cir. 1978), quoting State v. Outten, 206 So.2d 392, 397 (Fla. 1968). 

Plaintiff concedes in his complaint that there were several audio and video recordings

made of drug buys involving him. These facts clearly establish probable cause. It is immaterial

that the charges against Plaintiff were nolle prossed. "The Constitution does not guarantee that

only the guilty will be arrested." Baker v. McCollan, 443 U.S. 137, 145 (1979). Section 1983

does not provide a cause of action for every defendant acquitted or every suspect released. Id.;

Rodriguez v. Ritchey, 556 F.2d 1185, 1190-91 (5 Cir. 1977). The Fourth Amendment requires

only that arrest be made pursuant to a reliable and fair determination of probable cause. Baker,
Page 4 of 5

Case No: 1:10-cv-00095-MP-AK

supra at 142.

In light of Plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court will permit Plaintiff an opportunity to

amend his Complaint to allege additional facts against the other defendants or delete them from

the pleading and to set forth more facts explaining how Defendant Zingg falsified documents

that caused his arrest. 

To amend his complaint, Plaintiff should completely fill out a new civil rights complaint

form, marking it “Amended Complaint.” The amended complaint must include all of Plaintiff’s

claims in this action and should not refer back to the original complaint. After completing the

new form, Plaintiff should mail it to the Court with a copy for each defendant. In amending,

Plaintiff should carefully review the following to determine whether he can present allegations

sufficient to state a cause of action: 

1) Plaintiff must state what rights have been violated under the Constitution, laws

or treaties of the United States. It is improper for the Plaintiff to merely list

constitutional or federal rights. Further, Plaintiff must provide support in the

statement of facts for the claimed violations.

2) Plaintiff should clearly describe how each named defendant is involved in the

alleged constitutional violation(s) in the body of the complaint. Plaintiff should note

that in civil rights cases, more than conclusory and vague allegations are required to

state a cause of action. Plaintiff must also show how he was harmed or injured by

the actions and/or omissions of the defendant(s).

3) Plaintiff should name only defendants who participated in the alleged deprivation

of constitutional rights or those persons who directed the action and/or omission that

resulted in such deprivation. 

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED:

1. Leave to Proceed (doc. 2) is GRANTED. 

2. The Clerk is directed to send the Plaintiff a blank Civil Rights Complaint form. 
Page 5 of 5

Case No: 1:10-cv-00095-MP-AK

3. After carefully considering whether he can state a cause of action in accordance with this

Order, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before August 27, 2010. 

4. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of this action.

DONE AND ORDERED this 11th day of August, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge