Lucas Haderman v. State of Arkansas

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

LUCAS JANTZ HADERMAN PLAINTIFF

V. CASE NO. 5:24-CV-5015

STATE OF ARKANSAS DEFENDANT

ORDER Now pending is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 7) of the Honorable Christy Comstock, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. Plaintiff is attempting to challenge the validity of a plea agreement he signed in 2017 in a state criminal prosecution. Upon de novo review of the case, the Court agrees that Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the doctrine set forth in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). Plaintiff’s Objection to the R&R (Doc. 9) fails to engage with the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning in any respect. Plaintiff only asks the Court for help in stating a cognizable claim, which the Court cannot offer. Moreover, indigent civil litigants have no constitutional right to the appointment of counsel, and the Court would only consider making a discretionary appointment if Plaintiff stated a non-frivolous, cognizable claim in the first instance—which he has not done. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Objection is OVERRULED, the R&R is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY, and the case is DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED on this 16th day of February, 2024. /s/ Timothy L. Brooks_______________ TIMOTHY L. BROOKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE