Mabry v. State of California

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

KEVIN DESHAN MABRY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 21-3026 (UNA)

)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such finding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A] complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”). Having reviewed the plaintiff’s complaint carefully, the Court concludes that what factual contentions are identifiable, including the plaintiff’s assertions that defendants are illegally monitoring his activities and threatening his life, are baseless and wholly incredible.

The Court will grant the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss the complaint without prejudice as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

DATE: November 22, 2021 /s/ COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY

United States District Judge