Michael Bauermeister v. Kor Xiong

440 F. App'x 521
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 21, 2011
Docket11-2485
StatusUnpublished

This text of 440 F. App'x 521 (Michael Bauermeister v. Kor Xiong) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Michael Bauermeister v. Kor Xiong, 440 F. App'x 521 (8th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Bauermeister appeals the district court’s 1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) dis *522 missal of his complaint, in which he requested that criminal charges be brought against the defendant. Upon careful review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114, 124, 99 S.Ct. 2198, 60 L.Ed.2d 755 (1979) (“[w]hether to prosecute and what charges to file or bring before a grand jury are decisions that generally rest in the prosecutor’s discretion”); cf. Roll v. Wayzata State Bank, 397 F.2d 124, 127 (8th Cir.1968) (affirming dismissal where plaintiff failed to plead intelligible grounds for federal jurisdiction; basis for federal jurisdiction must affirmatively appear clearly and distinctly). We further conclude that, to the extent Mr. Bauermeister has attempted to advance a new claim on appeal, that claim is not properly before this court. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir.2004) (stating general rule that claims not presented in district court may not be advanced for first time on appeal).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
440 F. App'x 521, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-bauermeister-v-kor-xiong-ca8-2011.