Norman v. United States of America
This text of Norman v. United States of America (Norman v. United States of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AUG 272009 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District and Bankruptcy Courts
STUART NORMAN, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 09 1631 ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et ai., ) ) Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and
his pro se complaint. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the complaint for the
reasons stated below.
Plaintiff, a federal prisoner, generally alleges that the prosecutors solicited perjured
testimony before the grand jury, that the defendants conspired to effect his criminal conviction,
and that the defendants otherwise committed fraud on the sentencing court, resulting in his
conviction and current incarceration. For these alleged violations of rights protected by the
United States Constitution, plaintiff demands "dismissal of the charges against his person alone
with an[J amount of compensation that will be sufficient to send a message to the courts that this
kind of illegal conduct will not be condoned," and "[a]n amount sufficient enough is
$125,000,000.00." CompI. at 20.
Plaintiff may be awarded damages only if he first establishes that his conviction has been
invalidated by "revers [al] on direct appeal, expunge [ment] by executive order, declar[ ation of
1 invalidity] by a state tribunal authorized to make such detennination, or ... a federal court's
issuance ofa writ of habeas corpus." Heckv. Humphrey, 512 US. 477, 486-87 (1994); accord
White v. Bowie, 194 F.3d 175 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (table). Plaintiff does not satisfy this prerequisite
and therefore his complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Court
therefore will dismiss the complaint under 28 US.c. § 1915A(b)(1). See, e.g., Leffebre v.
United States Fed. Corp., No.1 :07-CV-743, 2007 WL 3389994, at *1 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 14,2007)
(adopting Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and dismissing suit seeking to
recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional imprisonment, or for other hann caused by
actions whose unlawfulness would render plaintiffs imprisonment invalid, under Heck).
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately on this same
date.
United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Norman v. United States of America, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norman-v-united-states-of-america-dcd-2009.