Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rainer v. Criminal Justice Center

United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division

November 14, 2019

ANTWON RANIER a/k/a SEAN MITCHELL a/k/a SEAN RANIER, Plaintiff,
v.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER, C. MOWERY, and R. TWILLEY, Defendants.

          ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT, CERTIFYING AN APPEAL WOULD NOT BE TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH, AND NOTIFYING PLAINTIFF OF APPELLATE FILING FEE

          THOMAS L. PARKER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff Antwon Rainer, a/k/a Sean Mitchell a/k/a Sean Rainer[1] sued pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and moved to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1-2.) The Court granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assessed the civil filing fee under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)-(b). (ECF No. 4.) The Court orders the Clerk to record Defendants as the CJC, Prosecutor C. Mowery, and Memphis Police Detective R. Twilley.

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff alleges, in full:

They violated [sic] my Amendment IV, Amendment V, Amendment VI, and my Amendment VIII, also my due process right of the law.

(ECF No. 1 at PageID 2.) In his demand for relief, Plaintiff does not specify what he wants and instead lists the following: “My pain and suffering, lost wages, depressing, stress, defamation of chara[c]ter[.]” (Id. at PageID 3.)

         In a letter sent to the Court, Plaintiff explains that he went to trial in state court on charges of rape and kidnapping even though he alleges there is no evidence that he committed those crimes. (ECF No. 6 at PageID 16.) The trial ended in a hung jury. (Id.) He insists he will not face trial again because the evidence is insufficient, and he asks the Court to obtain the transcript from his preliminary hearing and the trial transcript “to see for Itsself [sic].” (Id. at PageID 16-17.)

         Plaintiff sent a second letter in which he details more proceedings in his criminal case. (ECF No. 7.) He asserts that his rights under the Thirteenth Amendment have been violated by delays in his retrial, complications with the parole board, and his continued confinement. (Id. at PageID 34-35.)

         LEGAL STANDARDS

         I. Screening Requirements Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

         The Court must screen prisoner complaints and dismiss any complaint, or any portion of it, if the complaint-

(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.