United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Southeastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, Jr., District Judge.
This matter is before the Court upon the motion of Shawn Yount (registration no. 167218) for leave to commence this action without payment of the required filing fee. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee, and therefore, the motion will be granted, and plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial filing fee of $1.98. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Furthermore, based upon a review of the complaint, the Court finds that this action should be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount of the filing fee. If the prisoner has insufficient funds in his or her prison account to pay the entire fee, the Court must assess and, when funds exist, collect an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of (1) the average monthly deposits in the prisoner's account, or (2) the average monthly balance in the prisoner's account for the prior six-month period. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the prisoner is required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of the prisoner will forward these monthly payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the prisoner's account exceeds $10, until the filing fee is fully paid. Id.
Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit and a certified copy of his prison account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the submission of his complaint. A review of plaintiff's account indicates an average monthly deposit of $9.92, and an average monthly balance of $0. Plaintiff has insufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee. Accordingly, the Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $1.98, which is 20 percent of plaintiff's average monthly deposit.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court may dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis in either law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams , 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007).
In reviewing a pro se complaint under § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must give the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction. Haines v. Kerner , 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992).
Plaintiff, an inmate at the Moberly Correctional Center, seeks monetary relief in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against defendants Carl Hefner (Sheriff of Stoddard County), Hank Trout (Captain, Stoddard County Sheriff's Department), Keith Haynes (Deputy, Stoddard County Sheriff's Department), Travis Stafford (Deputy, Stoddard County Sheriff's Department) and Andy Holden (Deputy, Stoddard County Sheriff's Department).
Plaintiff alleges that he was incarcerated at the Stoddard County Jail on July 14, 2010, after defendants Hefner and Trout planted evidence on him in order to confine him. Plaintiff claims that, for three days, he was placed in a "very small room" with no toilet or sink and was given a mattress "with only half of the inside part." He further states that, as a result of this confinement, he contracted neuropathy. Plaintiff states that he subsequently was moved to "C-block, " where he contracted hepatitis C.
In addition, plaintiff claims that on July 21, 2010, defendants Trout and Hefner executed a search warrant relative to plaintiff's motor vehicle. The search revealed numerous items that were either stolen during burglaries or were considered to have been used in burglaries. Plaintiff states that the police report was "signed by Captain Hank Trout and states Sheriff Carl Hefner was with him."
Plaintiff further claims that on June 23, 2010, defendants Trout and Hefner investigated a burglary at a business owned by Kenneth Bell. Liberally construing the complaint, plaintiff is alleging that, after recovering numerous stolen items from an individual named Don St. Cin, defendants Trout and Hefner planted the stolen items in ...