Cooney v. Arkansas, State of

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

KRISHONN COONEY PLAINTIFF ADC #107617

v. No. 4:21-cv-717-DPM

TAYLOR DOOBIE, Officer, Morrilton Police Department; NATHAN WATKINS, Officer, Morrilton Police Department; and WILLCUT, Detective DEFENDANTS

AMENDED ORDER 1. Cooney’s motion to reopen this case, Doc. 51, is granted. 2. The Court must screen the amended complaint. Doc. 51; 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Officer Doobie pulled Cooney over. Cooney says that Officer Doobie claimed it was because he knew Cooney didn’t have a driver’s license. After Officer Watkins and Detective Willcut arrived, the three officers searched Cooney’s car. They found drugs. Cooney says they later took him to his family member’s apartment where, he claims, they destroyed a lot of property searching for more contraband. 3. Cooney fails to state a claim for the search of his family member’s apartment. United States v. Gomez, 16 F.3d 254, 256 (8th Cir. 1994). But service is appropriate on his § 1983 claim based on the traffic stop and search. The Clerk shall prepare summonses for Officer Doobie, Officer Watkins, and Detective Willcut, and the United States

Marshal shall serve those summons and copies of the amended complaint, Doc. 51, without prepayment of fees and costs or security. Service may be made at the Morrilton Police Department, 119 N Division Street, Morrilton, Arkansas 72110. 4. Cooney’s motion for a status update, Doc. 52, is granted. The Court directs the Clerk to resend him a copy of the docket sheet and his financial printout. So Ordered.

MIVALAM 9 D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge Alo Avavst 2022

-2-