Ali v. John Dow

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

ABDUL N. ALI,

Plaintiff,

-v- 8:24-CV-128

JOHN DOW et al.,

Defendants.1

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL:

ABDUL N. ALI Plaintiff, Pro Se 23-B-4295 Orleans Correctional Facility 3531 Gaines Basin Road Albion, NY 14411

DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge

ORDER ON REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

On January 29, 2024, pro se plaintiff Abdul N. Ali (“plaintiff”), an inmate in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision at Orleans Correctional Facility, filed this action alleging that four St. Lawrence County police officers violated his civil rights

1 Plaintiff’s amended complaint names a different set of defendants. The Clerk of the Court will be directed to amend the caption accordingly. when they picked him up on a warrant. See Dkt. No. 1. Along with his complaint, plaintiff moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP

Application”). Dkt. Nos. 3–4. Thereafter, plaintiff filed an amended complaint that names a different set of municipal officials. Dkt. No. 6. On May 29, 2024, U.S. Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel granted plaintiff’s IFP Application and advised by Report & Recommendation (“R&R”)

that plaintiff’s amended complaint be dismissed without leave to further amend. Dkt. No. 7. As Judge Hummel explained, certain of plaintiff’s federal-law claims were barred by immunity principles while others were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), a Supreme Court doctrine

that bars civil rights claims that would necessarily imply the invalidity of an otherwise valid, underlying conviction. See id. Plaintiff has filed objections. Dkt. No. 10. Upon de novo review, the R&R is accepted and will be adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 7) is ACCEPTED; 2. The Clerk is directed to ADD defendants “Det. Arthor Shattuck,” “Det.

John Doe,” “Assistant District Attorney Sarah Carpenter,” “St. Lawrence County District Attorney,” and “Robert Fix, Esq.”; 3. The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE defendants “John Dow,” “John Dow #2,” “John Dow #3,” and “John Dow #4”;

4. Plaintiff’s claims against defendant St. Lawrence County District Attorney and defendant Assistant District Attorney Sarah Carpenter in their official capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice as barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity;

5. Plaintiff’s claims against defendant St. Lawrence County District Attorney and defendant Assistant District Attorney Sarah Carpenter in their individual capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice as barred by absolute prosecutorial immunity;

6. Plaintiff’s false arrest and conspiracy claims against defendant Det. Arthor Shattuck and defendant Det. John Doe are DISMISSED without prejudice but without leave to amend as barred by Heck v. Humphrey; 7. Any municipality-liability claim against St. Lawrence County based on

the conduct of the named defendants is DISMISSED without prejudice but without leave to amend as barred by Heck v. Humphrey; 8. Plaintiff’s federal-law claims against defendant Robert Fix, Esq. are DISMISSED without prejudice but without leave to amend as barred by Heck

v. Humphrey; 9. The Court DECLINES to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law malpractice claim against defendant Robert Fix, Esq.; and 10. Insofar as plaintiff may seek habeas corpus relief, that request is DISMISSED without prejudice to bring a separate and appropriate habeas

corpus proceeding, but without an opportunity to renew in this proceeding. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a judgment accordingly and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 18, 2024 David NiHucd Utica, New York. U.S. Di ict Judge