Michael Price v. Bobby Cummings
17-50453
| 5th Cir. | Mar 23, 2018Background
- Michael L. Price, a Texas prisoner, sued various state actors under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking release, expungement of his conviction, and $100,000,000, alleging his indictment was void and state procedures violated.
- Defendants included a state judge, two district attorneys, a private attorney, a district clerk, a sheriff, court personnel, and a prison warden — all sued in their individual capacities.
- The district court dismissed the complaint sua sponte as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), finding judicial and prosecutorial immunity where applicable, lack of state action by the private attorney, no personal involvement by several defendants, and Heck v. Humphrey barred damages claims challenging conviction.
- The district court noted habeas corpus (after exhaustion) as the proper vehicle for challenging the conviction and sentence.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed for abuse of discretion, found Price failed to challenge the district court’s legal reasoning in his brief, and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.
- The court denied Price’s supplemental motions, imposed a § 1915(g) strike (bringing him to at least three strikes), barred future IFP filings absent imminent danger, and warned of additional sanctions for repetitive frivolous filings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immunity for judge | Price argued suit against Judge Cummings in individual capacity overcomes immunity because indictment was void | Defendants invoked absolute judicial immunity | Court held judge entitled to absolute judicial immunity; dismissal proper |
| Immunity for prosecutors | Price contended prosecutors were liable because indictment was unconstitutional | Defendants invoked absolute prosecutorial immunity | Court held prosecutors entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity |
| Private attorney/state action | Price alleged misconduct by attorney Frank Price | District court found no allegation that Frank Price acted as a state actor | Court affirmed that private attorney was not alleged to be a state actor; claim fails |
| Challenges to conviction/damages (Heck bar) | Price sought damages and release based on allegedly void indictment | Defendants argued Heck bars damages that would imply invalidity of conviction; habeas is proper route | Court held Heck bars the damages claims and directed habeas procedure for collateral attack |
| Personal involvement of other defendants | Price named clerk, sheriff, warden and others | District court found no pleaded personal involvement by these officers | Court affirmed dismissal for failure to allege personal involvement |
| Appeal frivolous / §1915(g) consequences | Price appealed and filed supplemental briefs | Court reviewed and found no meritorious legal challenge; supplemental filings irrelevant | Appeal dismissed as frivolous; §1915(g) strike imposed; future IFP barred absent imminent danger |
Key Cases Cited
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (damages claims that would imply invalidity of conviction are barred absent prior favorable termination)
- Black v. Warren, 134 F.3d 732 (5th Cir. 1998) (standard of review for §1915(e)(2)(B) frivolous dismissals)
- Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222 (5th Cir. 1993) (pro se briefs receive liberal construction)
- Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744 (5th Cir. 1987) (issues not briefed on appeal are abandoned)
- Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir. 1983) (dismissal of frivolous appeals)
- Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759 (2015) (dismissal as frivolous counts as a strike under §1915(g))
- Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 1996) (discussing strikes and frivolous filings)