1

 Walton did not sue the prosecutor associated with his criminal case. 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KENNETH WALTON, Case No. 09-13622

Plaintiff, HONORABLE SEAN F. COX

United States District Judge

v. 

SANDRA CICIRELLI

Defendant. 

_____________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff Kenneth Walton (“Walton”) has filed this pro se civil rights complaint pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Walton’s complaint [Doc. No. 1] seeks to assert § 1983 claims against the Hon. Sandra

Ciccirelli, of the 18th District Court of Michigan, for alleged wrongs suffered by Walton in

connection with a criminal case against him. The substance of Walton’s complaint appears

below: 

I Kenneth Walton was wrong(s) (sic) by permanent word(s) and Docket No. 06-

115404; appear and continues to exist diminishing plaintiff (sic) ability to make a

living. 

Wrong(s)

1. Prosecutorial vindictiveness1

2. Plea offer violation

3. Order of action loss of driving privileges

4. Subordinate (sic) perjury

Plaintiff have (sic) suffer greatly from this mental shock, cause (sic) by Judge

Sandra A. Cicirelli, to immediately return his personal property that was

2:09-cv-13622-SFC-MAR Doc # 5 Filed 09/23/09 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 22
2

unconstitutional (sic) taken under Case No. 06-115404. 

[Pl.’s Complaint, Doc. No. 1]. Walton also seeks a money judgment against the Hon. Sandra

Cicirelli in the amount of $10,000,000.00 per claimed violation. Id. 

Walton has been granted in forma pauperis status. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), a

district court may sua sponte dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint before service on the

defendants if the court determines that the action “is frivolous or meritless.” 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2); Harris v. Johnson, 784 F.2d 222, 223 (6th Cir. 1986). 

A complaint may be dismissed as frivolous “where it lacks an arguable basis either in law

or fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Sullivan v. Ford, 828 F.Supp. 480, 481

(E.D.Mich. 1993). A complaint for damages is frivolous as to defendants who are clearly

immune from damages. Sullivan, 828 F.Supp. at 482 (citing Neitzke, supra). 

Here, Walton seeks to recover § 1983 damages based upon alleged actions taken by the

Hon. Sandra Cicirelli in her official capacity as a judge of the 18th District Court of Michigan. It

is well established, however, that judges enjoy absolute immunity from § 1983 liability for

actions allegedly taken in their official capacity. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967). 

Therefore, Walton’s complaint is frivolous. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), this action is

hereby DISMISSED as frivolous. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

S/Sean F. Cox 

Sean F. Cox

United States District Judge

Dated: September 23, 2009

2:09-cv-13622-SFC-MAR Doc # 5 Filed 09/23/09 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 23
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KENNETH WALTON, Case No. 09-13622

Plaintiff, HONORABLE SEAN F. COX

United States District Judge

v. 

SANDRA CICIRELLI

Defendant. 

_____________________________________/

PROOF OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record 

on September 23, 2009, by electronic mail and by ordinary mail upon:

Kenneth Walton 

2139 Walnut 

Inkster, MI 48141 

S/Jennifer Hernandez 

Case Manager

2:09-cv-13622-SFC-MAR Doc # 5 Filed 09/23/09 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 24