United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Western Division
Procedure for Filing Objections
Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) has
been sent to Judge D.P. Marshall Jr. You may file written
objections to this Recommendation. If you file objections,
they must be specific and must include the factual or legal
basis for your objection.
objections must be received in the office of the Court Clerk
within 14 days of the date this Recommendation is filed. If
no objections are filed, Judge Marshall can adopt this
Recommendation without independently reviewing the record. By
not objecting, you may also waive any right to appeal
questions of fact.
Eric Reed, a pre-trial detainee at the Faulkner County
Detention Center (“Detention Center”), filed this
lawsuit without the help of a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. §
1983. (Docket entry #2) Because Mr. Reed's original
complaint was flawed, he was given an opportunity to amend
his complaint to remedy the defects identified by the Court.
(#5) Mr. Reed has now filed his amended complaint. (#8)
Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) requires
federal courts to screen prisoner complaints that seek relief
against a governmental entity, officer, or employee before
ordering service of process. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The
Court must dismiss claims that are legally frivolous or
malicious; that fail to state a claim upon which relief may
be granted; or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who
is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). When
making this determination, a court must accept the truth of
the factual allegations set out in the complaint, and it may
consider the documents attached to the complaint.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009);
Reynolds v. Dormire, 636 F.3d 976, 979 (8th Cir.
Faulkner County Sheriff's Office and Faulkner County
Detention Center In his original complaint, Mr. Reed named
the Faulkner County Sheriff's Office and the Faulkner
County Detention Center as Defendants. As previously
explained to Mr. Reed, these Defendants are not entities that
can be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See, e.g.,
Ketchum v. City of West Memphis, 974 F.2d 81, 82
(8th Cir. 1992) (police department is not an entity
“suable as such”); Dean v. Barber, 951
F.2d 1210, 1214 (11th Cir. 1992) (“Sheriff's
departments and police departments are not usually considered
legal entities subject to suit” under § 1983);
Martinez v. Winner, 771 F.2d 424, 444 (10th Cir.
1985) (the police department is not a separate suable
entity); and Owens v. Scott County Jail,
328 F.3d 1026, 1027 (8th Cir. 2003) (“jails are not
legal entities amenable to suit”).
Defendants Ferguson and Fletcher
motion for the Court to accept the amendments to his
complaint (#9), Mr. Reed asks to dismiss claims against
Defendants Ferguson and Fletcher. Thus, Mr. Reed's claims
against those Defendants should be dismissed, without
original and amended complaints, Mr. Reed claims that
officers who arrested him in November 2017, violated his
fourth amendment rights by arresting him following a traffic
stop. He further claims that he was denied a lawyer for
thirty-three days, in violation of his sixth amendment right
to counsel; that he was denied a “reasonable cause
hearing” in his state court criminal case; that he was
charged by felony information rather by indictment, in
violation of his due process rights; and that he has not been
afforded a bond hearing or a suppression hearing in his
state-court criminal case.
Court has reviewed Mr. Reed's state-court criminal case,
State v. Reed, Faulkner County Circuit Court No.
23CR-17-1194. The docket sheet in that case indicates
that, on November 15, 2017, Mr. Reed was arrested following a
traffic stop. On November 17, by felony information, Mr. Reed
was charged with possession of methamphetamine and possession
of drug paraphernalia. On the same date, Mr. Reed was brought
before the Faulkner County Circuit Court for an initial
appearance. At that hearing, the circuit ...