Dietrick Johnson, Sr. v. City of Dallas
678 F. App'x 216
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Johnson, a federal prisoner convicted of carjacking, sued under § 1983 and Bivens alleging unlawful searches, failure to secure his apartment (leading to theft of his property), and wrongful impoundment/disposition of his truck.
- Defendants included the City of Dallas, Dallas Police Department (DPD) and its auto-impound unit, U.S. Marshal Service (USMS), Collin County Sheriff’s Office, and sheriff’s deputies.
- The district court dismissed Johnson’s complaint and certified that his appeal was not taken in good faith.
- Johnson moved to proceed IFP on appeal; the Fifth Circuit limits review to whether the appeal presents legal points arguable on their merits.
- The court found Johnson abandoned issues by failing to address the district court’s reasoning, and held several claims were legally barred or defective (preclusion, entity capacity, Bivens limitations).
- The appeal was dismissed as frivolous, the IFP motion denied, and the dismissal plus prior dismissals produced four § 1915(g) strikes, barring future IFP filings absent imminent danger.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of searches and failure to secure apartment | Johnson alleged unlawful searches and that deputies left his apartment unsecured causing theft | Defendants relied on district-court dismissal and Johnson failed to brief district-court reasons on appeal | Johnson abandoned issues by not addressing district-court reasons; appeal frivolous |
| Disposition of truck / relitigation | Johnson challenged DPD/impound unit giving truck away after arrest | Defendants: claim precluded because same claim was litigated and rejected in prior § 1983 action | Claim precluded; may not be relitigated |
| Capacity of Collin County Sheriff’s Office to be sued under § 1983 | Johnson sued the sheriff’s office as an entity | Defendants: sheriff’s office lacks capacity to be sued under § 1983 | Court affirmed lack of capacity; claim not permissible |
| Bivens suit against USMS (federal agency) | Johnson sued USMS under Bivens | Defendants: Bivens permits suits only against individual federal officers, not agencies | Bivens does not authorize suit against federal agencies; claim dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197 (5th Cir. 1997) (standard for determining good-faith appeal for IFP purposes)
- Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir. 1983) (appeal review limited to whether issues are arguable on their merits)
- FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471 (1994) (Bivens relief does not extend to federal agencies)
- Darby v. Pasadena Police Dep’t, 939 F.2d 311 (5th Cir. 1991) (municipal entities or police departments may lack capacity to be sued under § 1983)
- Bailey v. Johnson, 846 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1988) (res judicata and relitigation bar in prisoner § 1983 claims)
- Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759 (2015) (prior dismissals for frivolousness or failure to state a claim count as strikes under § 1915(g))