United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
L. WHITE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter is before the Court on the motion of plaintiff Hosea
Lee Robinson for leave to commence this civil action without
prepayment of the required filing fee. Having reviewed the
motion and the financial information submitted in support,
the Court has determined to grant the motion, and assess an
initial partial filing fee of $1.00. In addition, for the
reasons discussed below, the Court will dismiss the
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)
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 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 $10.00, until the
filing fee is fully paid. Id.
construing the instant motion, plaintiff states he has
requested a copy of his account statement, but it has not
been given to him. The Court will therefore assess a nominal
initial partial filing fee of $1.00. See Henderson v.
Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 484 (8th Cir. 1997) (when a
prisoner is unable to provide the Court with a certified copy
of his prison account statement, the Court should assess an
amount "that is reasonable, based on whatever
information the court has about the prisoner's
finances."). If plaintiff wishes to claim that he is
unable to pay $1.00, he must submit a copy of his prison
account statement in support of such claim.
Standard on Initial Review
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss
a complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted. To state a claim for relief under § 1983, a
complaint must plead more than "legal conclusions"
and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action [that are] supported by mere conclusory
statements." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim
for relief, which is more than a "mere possibility of
misconduct." Id. at 679. "A claim has
facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."
Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a
plausible claim for relief is a context-specific task that
requires the reviewing court to, inter alia, draw
upon judicial experience and common sense. Id. at
complaints are to be liberally construed. Estelle v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). However, they still
must allege sufficient facts to support the claims alleged.
Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914-15 (8th Cir.
2004); see also Martin v. Aubuchon, 623 F.2d 1282,
1286 (8th Cir. 1980) (even pro se complaints are required to
allege facts which, if true, state a claim for relief as a
matter of law). Federal courts are not required to
"assume facts that are not alleged, just because an
additional factual allegation would have formed a stronger
complaint." Stone, 364 F.3d at 914-15. In
addition, giving a pro se complaint the benefit of a liberal
construction does not mean that procedural rules in ordinary
civil litigation must be interpreted so as to excuse mistakes
by those who proceed without counsel. See McNeil v.
U.S., 508 U.S. 106, 113(1993).
is an inmate at the St. Louis City Justice Center. He states
that he brings this action pursuant to the "ADA"
(the Americans With Disabilities Act) and the
"ADAAA" (the Americans With Disabilities Act
Amendments Act). (Docket No. 1 at 1). He also states he is
suing for violation of his rights under the Sixth, Eighth and
Fourteenth Amendments. He has named the State of Missouri as
the sole defendant.
alleges that, on February 7, 2016, the defendant ordered him
held on a $100, 000 cash-only bond, and that "this order
discriminated against plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment of Due
Process based on plaintiffs physical disability of coronary
heart disease and congestive heart failure."
Id. at 1-2. Plaintiff also claims that defendant
"discriminated" his right to a fair hearing, and he
states he "alleges 8th Amendment violation of excessive
bail, and cruel and unusual punishment." Id. at
2. Next, plaintiff states that he "alleges violation of
(ADA), (ADAAA)." Id. He cites his "speedy
trial deadline" and states he filed a motion to dismiss
the criminal charges pending against him, and he states he
was not allowed to submit evidence of physical injuries.
Id. at 3. Plaintiff also writes "deliberate
indifference, " and states that evidence he submitted in
another lawsuit shows that his disabilities worsened while he
was in state custody. He contends that the defendant
"discriminated against [his] access to courts. Based on
worsening physical disabilities of physical injuries."
(Docket No. 1 at 5). Plaintiff includes numerous case
citations, but does not explain how they pertain to his case.
As relief, he asks the Court to dismiss the indictment and
all criminal charges against him "with prejudice for the
state's violation of [his] constitutional rights to fair
Court will first consider plaintiffs ADA and ADAAA claims.
Title II of the ADA provides that "no qualified
individual with a disability shall, by reason of such
disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied
the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a
public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such
entity." Bahl v. County of Ramsey, 695 F.3d
778, 783 (8th Cir. 2012) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 12132). In
order to state a claim under Title II of the ADA or the
ADAAA, plaintiff must allege that (1) he is a qualified
individual with a disability; (2) that he was excluded from
participation in or denied the benefits of the services,
programs, or activities of a public entity or was otherwise
subjected to discrimination by a public entity; and (3) that
such exclusion, denial of benefits, or other discrimination
was by reason of his disability. Baribeau v. City of
Minneapolis, 596 F.3d 465, 484 (8th Cir. 2010) (citing
Layton v. Elder, 143 F.3d 469, 472 (8th Cir. 1998)).
alleges that he is disabled. However, he does not allege that
he was excluded from participation in or denied the benefits
of the services, programs or activities of a public entity,
nor does he allege that he suffered exclusion, denial of
benefits, or other discrimination by reason ...