IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
January 19, 2010
WILLIAM BRANDON CUMMINGS
DONALD BEERE, ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Fullam, Sr. J.
Plaintiff, a prisoner, has filed a pro se complaint against Donald Beese (whose surname was misspelled on the docket), George Green, and Patricia H. Jenkins.*fn1 To the extent that Plaintiff's complaint is intelligible, he challenges his criminal conviction as being unconstitutional and seeks relief from his sentence. Plaintiff does not seek any monetary damages.
Plaintiff has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. On March 5, 2009, that motion was denied without prejudice and the case was closed. The Order stated that if Plaintiff filed a statement of his intent to proceed with the lawsuit and incur the $350 filing fee the case would be re-opened.
In March 2009, Plaintiff submitted a "Declaration in Support of Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis" and a "Supplemental Amendment to Civil Action Complaint." Because the declaration sufficiently expresses Plaintiff's intent to proceed with the lawsuit, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.
28 U.S.C. § 1915 provides that when a civil action is filed in forma pauperis, the Court shall dismiss the action if the case is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(i). This civil action will be dismissed as frivolous because challenges to the validity of a prisoner's confinement must be addressed in an action requesting a writ of habeas corpus and not a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973).
Even if plaintiff had asserted claims that could be brought in a § 1983 cause of action he does not allege any facts that would support the conclusion that any of the defendants acted unlawfully.
An order will be entered.
John P. Fullam, Sr. J.